Political Correctness next victim: Comedy. Towards a Orwellian nightmare?

[fkizz]

Recurrently demanding (or if needed blackmailing) speech to be silenced, sounds like good old days of PIDE in Estado Novo. Simply they don't use direct physical force, but threats of lawsuits and career damaging slander instead.

[Fanest]

I feel you're confusing the actions of individuals with the views of a group.

Im not confusing anything but apparently u are, and why dont u answer my question - u see there is a question mark at the end of my sentence...

Not their views their actions - if somebody is shouting insult after insult at your and not letting u speak how is that not limiting your freedom of speech in that space and time?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Well, it's not. Freedom of speech is not being able to physically speak and be heard at every second. I am sorry, but you're being extremist about this. As far as I can see none of you can show how these SJWs are doing more than expressing their view.

[StarDreamer]

All I needed to know to add a certain person to the ignore list, finally I gave up on him. First guy I ever put on ignore.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Says the guy who is such a big advocate of freedom of speech. You defend far-right mobs intimidating people of the streets but can't deal with some college kids saying shite, or anybody who asks you to explain yourself. Too ironic.

[Dragus]

Sounds like he needed a safe space to escape mental confrontation.

[Basil II the B.S]

Or simply Ferrets posts are so self-contraddicting that there's hardly any need to discuss them.
He whines about imaginary far right mobs intimidating people with different views and in the same posts defends SJWs intimidating people with different views, which by the way is exactly what he does on this forum, trying to bully people whose views he doesn't share.
''2+2=4 when I like it, but not when you do it. ''

[removeduser_487563287433]

Sounds like he needed a safe space to escape mental confrontation.

Yep. Irony.

[fkizz]

defends SJWs intimidating people with different views, which by the way is exactly what he does on this forum, trying to bully people whose views he doesn't share.
''2+2=4 when I like it, but not when you do it. ''

We could make a TWC group about Ferrets recurrent de-railing. Like "the brotherhood" in 1984

[StarDreamer]

Sounds like he needed a safe space to escape mental confrontation.

I rarely agree with Basil, but yeah what he said. I'm just tired of hitting my head against a wall of dishonest debating.

[ByzantinePowerGame]

I rarely agree with Basil, but yeah what he said. I'm just tired of hitting my head against a wall of dishonest debating.

Read Mein Kampf, Hitler said he dealt with this frequently in the early-mid 1920s. He would debate somebody in a beer hall on Monday night, answer all of their points, they would finally concede defeat and leave, then Tuesday or Wednesday night the same person who previously conceded defeat would come into another beer hall and interrupt Hitler in front of a new audience, raising the same points as before, acting as though the previous debate had never taken place, and trying to interrupt and heckle. Hitler would explain that those points had been answered the day before or two days before and that he would not let them hijack his talk, they would try to interrupt again and that was when it became necessary for the SA to beat the person bloody and drag them outside.

[Himster]

Read Mein Kampf, Hitler said he dealt with this frequently in the early-mid 1920s. He would debate somebody in a beer hall on Monday night, answer all of their points, they would finally concede defeat and leave, then Tuesday or Wednesday night the same person who previously conceded defeat would come into another beer hall and interrupt Hitler in front of a new audience, raising the same points as before, acting as though the previous debate had never taken place, and trying to interrupt and heckle. Hitler would explain that those points had been answered the day before or two days before and that he would not let them hijack his talk, they would try to interrupt again and that was when it became necessary for the SA to beat the person bloody and drag them outside.

Just because your comparison is creepily accurate does not mean it doesn't break Godwin's Law. God dammit.

[StarDreamer]

Read Mein Kampf, Hitler said he dealt with this frequently in the early-mid 1920s. He would debate somebody in a beer hall on Monday night, answer all of their points, they would finally concede defeat and leave, then Tuesday or Wednesday night the same person who previously conceded defeat would come into another beer hall and interrupt Hitler in front of a new audience, raising the same points as before, acting as though the previous debate had never taken place, and trying to interrupt and heckle. Hitler would explain that those points had been answered the day before or two days before and that he would not let them hijack his talk, they would try to interrupt again and that was when it became necessary for the SA to beat the person bloody and drag them outside.

Well, I have never read mein kampf and most likely never will. I would never advocate for any violence, no matter how disruptive someone is. What you could say is that such a way of debating is not constructive and seemingly doesn't lead to the victim of such "debate" to lose. Dangerous ideas need to be engaged in detail and not simply dismissed with one word "answers" like bigot/racist/whathaveyou. Doing so just makes it seem that the person saying it has no rational way of addressing it and tries desperately to engage in an emotional way instead.

[Basil II the B.S]

I'm just going to stick to make idiotic posts look idiotic.

[Mangalore]

SJWs and radical feminists are by definition authoritan. ....

Quite frankly I'm pondering of making a thread solely about the question: Do these groups really exist as a meaningful factor or do they exist like white elephants exist because as supposedly the prime target of these groups I don't see it... the events seem mainly stupid media being stupidly after their next ratings hype like squirrels on Crack and then triggering certain insecurities among various subgroups because a woman is loud or something.

I mean, I would like media to stop and do quality journalism instead but that's not really a problem of any actual or perceived political group or individual out there. As said, the fact of people complaining about getting shut up via social shaming as if that is a new thing when people say stupid is pretty equally spread over all political ideologies. Quite frankly the new thing is that it doesn't work as well anymore as it used to.

In the olden days people were far more worried about looking stupid in public than today.

... Simply they don't use direct physical force, but threats of lawsuits and career damaging slander instead.

People behave as if that is a new thing. The innovation was us stopping to use physical force, you know. None said anything about not being a dick to political groups you dislike. We did that back when we also broke people's legs over a diverting opinion about labor rights as a side dish.

If I look back to the 50s or 60s in Germany polititicans loved to do far more nasty stuff to the media, each other, free speech and people than they do today. If it changed, it mainly changed for the better and just everyone overall got more sensible and defensive.

[StarDreamer]

Quite frankly I'm pondering of making a thread solely about the question: Do these groups really exist as a meaningful factor or do they exist like white elephants exist because as supposedly the prime target of these groups I don't see it... the events seem mainly stupid media being stupidly after their next ratings hype like squirrels on Crack and then triggering certain insecurities among various subgroups because a woman is loud or something.

I mean, I would like media to stop and do quality journalism instead but that's not really a problem of any actual or perceived political group or individual out there. As said, the fact of people complaining about getting shut up via social shaming as if that is a new thing when people say stupid is pretty equally spread over all political ideologies. Quite frankly the new thing is that it doesn't work as well anymore as it used to.

In the olden days people were far more worried about looking stupid in public than today.

Well I for one welcome a strong equal woman, noicyness doesn't really enter into it either way. I am after all a traditional feminist/equalitarian. And we do have few SJWs on this forum. You'll notice them by their catchphrases of bigot/racist/nazi/far-right.

The problem with radical feminists is their perceived injustice among the sexes in the west so as to be blind to the actual patriarchal societies/cultures in the world. And their mindblowingly perplexing defence of these cultures.

And social shaming still exists as a thing, it has just been used so much in places where it isn't even closely correct that it loses its meaning. It can still cause real damage to innocent people when someone else with power wants to shy away from controvcersy so much as to not care about facts. The fact this phenomenon even exists is enough that it should be brought to light so that people don't lose their jobs due to a slander campaign.

[removeduser_487563287433]

We could make a TWC group about Ferrets recurrent de-railing. Like "the brotherhood" in 1984

It wouldn't be the first time a group of people got butthurt enough to go to that length. I remember the Greeks went to make their own forum at one point.

[mongrel]

Read Mein Kampf, Hitler said he dealt with this frequently in the early-mid 1920s. He would debate somebody in a beer hall on Monday night, answer all of their points, they would finally concede defeat and leave, then Tuesday or Wednesday night the same person who previously conceded defeat would come into another beer hall and interrupt Hitler in front of a new audience, raising the same points as before, acting as though the previous debate had never taken place, and trying to interrupt and heckle. Hitler would explain that those points had been answered the day before or two days before and that he would not let them hijack his talk, they would try to interrupt again and that was when it became necessary for the SA to beat the person bloody and drag them outside.

The book is rubbish. That same person need only have waited 25 years in order to dance on a defeated Hitler's smouldering remains.

[fkizz]

People behave as if that is a new thing. The innovation was us stopping to use physical force, you know. None said anything about not being a dick to political groups you dislike. We did that back when we also broke people's legs over a diverting opinion about labor rights as a side dish.

If I look back to the 50s or 60s in Germany polititicans loved to do far more nasty stuff to the media, each other, free speech and people than they do today. If it changed, it mainly changed for the better and just everyone overall got more sensible and defensive.

I know it's nothing new under the Sun, but lately the SJWs have gotten too.. trigger happy. 0 trigger discipline in their slander, to the point of ridiculous.

[removeduser_487563287433]

The book is rubbish. That same person need only have waited 25 years in order to dance on a defeated Hitler's smouldering remains.

I like that anecdote from Hitler though. Basically he has a drunken argument, gets called up the next day, rather than responding to the arguments he pretends it's already been answered and pretends his dignity is too high to respond. We have far-right posters doing that all the time.