Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24022
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Mo » 09 May 2019, 13:36

JasonL wrote:
thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:26
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life.
No, they haven't. The Extremely Online left has. The friendly neighborhood Blue who uses the internet mostly to get sports scores and shop has no idea that mansplaining is a serious crime.
The extremely online randos, the media hubs, the academy and all of tech. I'm probably missing a few. Enough that you are politically doomed if you are economically left but don't say the right words.
Which explains why Joe Biden is polling so poorly.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 23557
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by JasonL » 09 May 2019, 13:41

We’ll see if it holds. It’s way too early but yes I think he’s doomed more or less for this reason.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 27426
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by thoreau » 09 May 2019, 13:42

Hey, I'll be the first to say that the SJWs have power in the off-line world. But they haven't overtaken the entire Blue coalition, as Mo notes regarding Biden.

There are a lot of people who think that "mansplain" is a sports injury to the groin area.
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24022
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Mo » 09 May 2019, 13:59

JasonL wrote:We’ll see if it holds. It’s way too early but yes I think he’s doomed more or less for this reason.
I think he’s doomed, but not for this stuff. It’s for the same reason he lost the last 3 times he ran. Including the fact that he ran before Bill Clinton ever did.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Kolohe
Posts: 13808
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:51

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Kolohe » 09 May 2019, 14:14

Your mom is a social construct.
when you wake up as the queen of the n=1 kingdom and mount your steed non sequiturius, do you look out upon all you survey and think “damn, it feels good to be a green idea sleeping furiously?" - dhex

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12008
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Ellie » 09 May 2019, 15:01

Kolohe wrote:
09 May 2019, 14:14
Your mom is a social construct.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
"He's just an idiot elected by idiots." - Pham

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 7466
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Shem » 09 May 2019, 15:52

JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Number 6
Posts: 3003
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:41

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Number 6 » 09 May 2019, 16:02

Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 15:52
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
I imagine it's the proximity and tangibility of the perceived threat.
" i discovered you eat dog dicks out of a bowl marked "dog dicks" because you're too stupid to remember where you left your bowl of dog dicks."-dhex, of course.
"Come, let us go forth and not rape together"-Jadagul

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6988
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Jadagul » 09 May 2019, 16:04

thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 11:06
I'm prepared to cede this particular match between Weinstein and Yglesias to Yglesias. Much as I dislike Yglesias, Weinstein isn't an IDWer that I follow or give a shit about, and I do agree that for reasonable definitions of "cultural social construct" math is indeed a cultural construct.

My bigger question, though, is "So what?" Once we've established that Weinstein isn't as clever as he thinks he is, and that even Matt Yglesias can have valid insights, what is the next step in a line of thinking that explores math as a cultural social construct?
I'll let you know when I manage to sell the book. :)

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 16815
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by lunchstealer » 09 May 2019, 16:32

thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 10:30
You guys would need an IDW if you'd been in some of the conversations that I've been in. A colleague tossed out a bunch of incoherent claims that more or less amounted to "Just about any adult is smart enough to major in physics", and when I pushed back (having certain male students and their struggles with algebra very much on my mind) I was told that I am no better than a high school teacher who said my colleague's niece is too pretty for physics.

After that conversation, Quillette is a cool, refreshing glass of iced tea while lounging on the beach to watch the sunset.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk
Do you guys have a laser that could have an accident at that guy? Like a vaporize a large chunk of their person accident? Because that seems like the kind of solution that's right for a physics department. That or weatherseal his door really well and hook the liquid nitrogen into his HVAC system until hypoxia does its beautiful work.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 23557
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by JasonL » 09 May 2019, 16:56

Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 15:52
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
I don't live in the 1960s for one. When was the last organized, broadly participated in boycott like that?

If I were to say something bad about the military or Christianity, that would not become an immediate HR review and fireable offense in any org large enough to have an HR department. The NR isn't the same as nearly every higher ed institution in america along with every other "serious" media outlet. NR screeds don't affect anyone's actual lives.

Thirdly, the character of the dissent is different. The main body of the left's take is "you have no right to say that - it's a threat". That's not the same thing as "you hate america".

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24022
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Mo » 09 May 2019, 16:57

Number 6 wrote:
Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 15:52
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
I imagine it's the proximity and tangibility of the perceived threat.
Yes. Oddly, I thin Matt Yglesias gets the general idea right here. At least with regard to the relative prominence of far lefties. Move the distribution two ticks to the left and you have a college campus.

his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24022
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Mo » 09 May 2019, 16:59

JasonL wrote:
Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 15:52
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
I don't live in the 1960s for one. When was the last organized, broadly participated in boycott like that?

If I were to say something bad about the military or Christianity, that would not become an immediate HR review and fireable offense in any org large enough to have an HR department. The NR isn't the same as nearly every higher ed institution in america along with every other "serious" media outlet. NR screeds don't affect anyone's actual lives.

Thirdly, the character of the dissent is different. The main body of the left's take is "you have no right to say that - it's a threat". That's not the same thing as "you hate america".
Is a high school considered large enough to have an HR department?

https://reason.com/2018/03/21/political ... gain-high/

How about flipping off a motorcade when you’re out for a bike ride?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43659653
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 23557
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by JasonL » 09 May 2019, 17:03

You don't want to start counting incidents by character of HR violation - again something like 80/20 is generous. Mandated training only runs one way. Sanction runs overwhelmingly one way.

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24022
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Mo » 09 May 2019, 17:11

That’s not saying the right isn’t just as energized about it, it’s just saying that the right holds less sway in corporations because the college educated class leans left and diverse.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 27426
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by thoreau » 09 May 2019, 17:24

Jadagul wrote:
09 May 2019, 16:04
thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 11:06
I'm prepared to cede this particular match between Weinstein and Yglesias to Yglesias. Much as I dislike Yglesias, Weinstein isn't an IDWer that I follow or give a shit about, and I do agree that for reasonable definitions of "cultural social construct" math is indeed a cultural construct.

My bigger question, though, is "So what?" Once we've established that Weinstein isn't as clever as he thinks he is, and that even Matt Yglesias can have valid insights, what is the next step in a line of thinking that explores math as a cultural social construct?
I'll let you know when I manage to sell the book. :)
In the mean time, if I'm interacting with somebody who hasn't read your book, would it be reasonable for my inner Bayesian to assume that most people who talk about the social construction of mathematics, especially outside of math and philosophy colloquia, and especially in the context of STEM education, are about to throw up a bunch of smoke screens around achievement gaps?
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 6988
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Jadagul » 09 May 2019, 17:36

thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 17:24
Jadagul wrote:
09 May 2019, 16:04
thoreau wrote:
09 May 2019, 11:06
I'm prepared to cede this particular match between Weinstein and Yglesias to Yglesias. Much as I dislike Yglesias, Weinstein isn't an IDWer that I follow or give a shit about, and I do agree that for reasonable definitions of "cultural social construct" math is indeed a cultural construct.

My bigger question, though, is "So what?" Once we've established that Weinstein isn't as clever as he thinks he is, and that even Matt Yglesias can have valid insights, what is the next step in a line of thinking that explores math as a cultural social construct?
I'll let you know when I manage to sell the book. :)
In the mean time, if I'm interacting with somebody who hasn't read your book, would it be reasonable for my inner Bayesian to assume that most people who talk about the social construction of mathematics, especially outside of math and philosophy colloquia, and especially in the context of STEM education, are about to throw up a bunch of smoke screens around achievement gaps?
Based on your description, your inner Bayesian should put a high priority on that whether people mention the social construction of mathematics or not.

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 7466
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Shem » 09 May 2019, 17:54

JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 16:56
I don't live in the 1960s for one. When was the last organized, broadly participated in boycott like that?
Do you have zero interaction with Christian Conservatives? It's like you Rip Van Winkled your way through decades of "we have to fight the homosexual anti-family assault on our families that Hollywood represents."

And how "broadly participated" are the protests and boycotts you're complaining about? We've been arguing efficacy; if you want to switch to numbers, your argument fares even worse.
NR screeds don't affect anyone's actual lives.
No, but churches sure do. And churches do at least as much to shape the character of their communities as colleges do, and nobody outside a few Wall of Separation weirdos says a word against it. I hear conservative academics complain, and part of me thinks "you should try being liberal in the church." And yeah, there are liberal churches, but there are conservative colleges. Doesn't change the difference in levels of prestige and control.
Thirdly, the character of the dissent is different. The main body of the left's take is "you have no right to say that - it's a threat". That's not the same thing as "you hate america".
In what world is calling someone a traitor in a time of war (which is the substance of the statement "you hate America") not an argument that someone "has no right to say that?"
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 23638
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Jennifer » 09 May 2019, 18:04

Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 17:54
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 16:56
I don't live in the 1960s for one. When was the last organized, broadly participated in boycott like that?
Do you have zero interaction with Christian Conservatives? It's like you Rip Van Winkled your way through decades of "we have to fight the homosexual anti-family assault on our families that Hollywood represents."

And how "broadly participated" are the protests and boycotts you're complaining about? We've been arguing efficacy; if you want to switch to numbers, your argument fares even worse.
NR screeds don't affect anyone's actual lives.
No, but churches sure do. And churches do at least as much to shape the character of their communities as colleges do, and nobody outside a few Wall of Separation weirdos says a word against it. I hear conservative academics complain, and part of me thinks "you should try being liberal in the church." And yeah, there are liberal churches, but there are conservative colleges. Doesn't change the difference in levels of prestige and control.
Thirdly, the character of the dissent is different. The main body of the left's take is "you have no right to say that - it's a threat". That's not the same thing as "you hate america".
In what world is calling someone a traitor in a time of war (which is the substance of the statement "you hate America") not an argument that someone "has no right to say that?"
FWIW, I can't recall any contemporary left-wing pundits who published books equivalent to Ann Coulter's "Treason," nor any left-wingers doing an equivalent of Michelle Malkin arguing that the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War Two was justified. I remember Kevin Williamson saying calmly and at length why women who get abortions should be executed as murderers; I don't know of any equally notable left-wingers arguing calmly why current laws should be changed so as to qualify millions of right-wing Americans for the death penalty.

Though I do recall Jason frequently dismissing such examples and arguing that really, the left wing is just as bad as the right wing these days, though without offering any concrete examples of why.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 16815
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by lunchstealer » 09 May 2019, 18:19

JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 16:56
Shem wrote:
09 May 2019, 15:52
JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 13:24
Mo wrote:
09 May 2019, 12:44
Yes. Which words are weapons is sports bar. Outside of a few weirdos, neither side disagrees with the statement. Despite being weirdos, the IDW peeps are not those weirdos or if they are, they get laryngitis when a lefty gets dinged.
Ahh - so, yeah - I'd put it at like 80/20 in practice. Not 100/0, not "there is no hypocrisy here", but not close. The entire left coalition has been taken over by identity politics and this is a fundamental not incidental feature of their views about life. The organizing principle of Social Justice types is that they get to determine allowable discourse period. There is no other real position.

I get it you can't disrepect the flag or soldiers and sometimes Israel on the right - but the scope of issues in play on the left is breathtaking - by design.
Or Donald Trump's suitability as President, or Christianity, or the place of religion in the public square, or whether Iraqistan was a good idea or...

Taking the idea that the party of Pat Robertson and "objectively pro-terrorism" is less organized around the principle of rendering massive areas off-limits from discourse than their counterparts seriously requires ignoring both the actions of the groups in question and the extent to which the policies and actions you're talking about have been pioneered and legitimized in their modern form by people on the right. Boycotts to attack undesirable groups (like gay people) have been used by the right for decades. The special pleading for the place of Christianity that National Review and their like love isn't any different than special pleading for *insert oppressed group here*. But one freaks you out, while the other one seems virtually invisible to you. Why is that?
I don't live in the 1960s for one. When was the last organized, broadly participated in boycott like that?
Have the Dixie Chicks gotten their career back on track? Legit asking because I literally have no idea.

If I were to say something bad about the military or Christianity, that would not become an immediate HR review and fireable offense in any org large enough to have an HR department. The NR isn't the same as nearly every higher ed institution in america along with every other "serious" media outlet. NR screeds don't affect anyone's actual lives.

Thirdly, the character of the dissent is different. The main body of the left's take is "you have no right to say that - it's a threat". That's not the same thing as "you hate america".
I know the character of the dissent is different, but that's because the frame through which each group confronts value differences is different. The left parrots YOU HATE AMERICA when Trump plays grabass with Putin and Kim, while the right plays Language of Oppression when Christianity gets criticized. But both those cases are basically using the tactics of the other for their own gain, not using their own rhetorical frame. But outside of the very far left, you don't really see the 'this language is a threat' in the field*. Certain Extremely Online branches of tech being the exception because they're Extremely Online.

*i've got some pretty-online but not Extremely Online friends on the bookfaces, the kinds who share lots of memes from Being Liberal and American News X and Occupy Democrats and the like. I don't see much of the you're colonizing black bodies when you eat chicken and waffles talk, and even then it's just when they link to a Ta Nahesi Coates column, not something they write themselves.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 23557
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by JasonL » 09 May 2019, 18:34

Uh, sure. Get back to me when there are mandatory respect the troops trainings at every company in america. Go to any HR department anywhere in america and say one thing each from each list and you let me know which one gets you fired. How hard is it to get deleted from platforms for comments from each camp. I think this is an absurd take tbh. This isn't a contest for who says the most extreme things, it's very specifically a comment about whose views are primarily, fundamentally about defining words as weapons, claiming threats and harm, and using those constructs to shut down dissent.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 23638
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Jennifer » 09 May 2019, 19:06

JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 18:34
Uh, sure. Get back to me when there are mandatory respect the troops trainings at every company in america. Go to any HR department anywhere in america and say one thing each from each list and you let me know which one gets you fired. How hard is it to get deleted from platforms for comments from each camp. I think this is an absurd take tbh. This isn't a contest for who says the most extreme things, it's very specifically a comment about whose views are primarily, fundamentally about defining words as weapons, claiming threats and harm, and using those constructs to shut down dissent.
So your "left and right equivalency" arguments are now based on such presumptions as "Companies telling staff members not to sexually harass each other is as bad as companies demanding mandatory 'respect the troops' patriotism?" Or that (for example) companies who fire employees for shit like 'Being literal Nazis who were photographed at a rally chanting 'Jews will not replace us?'" are as much a threat to freedom as, like, a POTUS whose current or former advisors include people who worry that Jews might replace us? Do you maintain that those politicians who whine that "Black Lives Matter" are radicals engaged in "blue racism" against noble hardworking police officers are not "claiming threats and harm" from BLM?
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13138
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Eric the .5b » 09 May 2019, 20:28

Some communication is on the threatening side.
“Don’t forget, we don’t let [border security agents]and we can’t let them use weapons,” Trump said of federal border security officials tasked with apprehending immigrants crossing into the United States from Mexico. “Other countries do, but we can’t. I would never do that. But, how do you stop these people?”

“Shoot them,” a rally attendee shouted.

Trump paused and smiled as the crowd cheered and laughed. “That’s only in the Panhandle you can get away with that statement,” Trump then said while shaking his head. “Only in the Panhandle.”
(Also, at some point in Trump's imagination, border security agents have been disarmed.)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 16815
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by lunchstealer » 09 May 2019, 21:28

JasonL wrote:
09 May 2019, 18:34
Uh, sure. Get back to me when there are mandatory respect the troops trainings at every company in america. Go to any HR department anywhere in america and say one thing each from each list and you let me know which one gets you fired. How hard is it to get deleted from platforms for comments from each camp. I think this is an absurd take tbh. This isn't a contest for who says the most extreme things, it's very specifically a comment about whose views are primarily, fundamentally about defining words as weapons, claiming threats and harm, and using those constructs to shut down dissent.
Do you really think there aren't places where expressing "Hey I'm gay and I just got married to another dude!" doesn't get you slow-rolled out of the company, if not straight up fired? It varies by state, but in at-will states that have excluded LGBT from workplace discrimination you can believe it happens. Or expressing the idea that police are the problem? Or saying that you participate in BDS? Or BDSM (although that also gets you burned in the over-woke places as well unless you're a dude who's totally and celibately sub)?

Yeah it's not institutional the way sanctions against open misogyny and racism are institutional, but there's a real reason why those got institutionally sanctioned in the first place that never ever applied to your populist reactionaries or IDW types.

ETA: "Uh, sure. Get back to me when there are mandatory respect the troops trainings at every company in america." I've worked for numerous companies big and small and never had anything but a handout on sexual harassment, and I've had a company-sponsored event with Sam Johnson where he talked about how companies were abusing the H1B process in a room full of people with H1Bs.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Andrew
Posts: 6480
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 21:52
Location: Vale of Eternal Fire

Re: Random Observations C.A (306 pages is enough)

Post by Andrew » 09 May 2019, 21:58

Where I work, "gays and trans people are degenerate queers who need to go back into the closet" would get me fired way before "the troops are baby killers and should all be tried and executed for war crimes." Perhaps that's just my department.
We live in the fucked age. Get used to it. - dhex

The sun only shines when a woman is being sexually abused. - Warren

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests