Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Strife26]

Haven't libertarians already broken the alingment? Socially liberal (kind of), fiscally conservative?

They've only broken the alingment once one of the main parties adjusts its base to encompass them, or the Libertarian party overtakes the Democrats or Republicans.

Or the American electorate and electoral system ceases to function on party lines, although I think that would require a different word than realignment. Revolution, maybe?

[Max™]

Yknow there is a chance that we could see a realignment that breaks the social/economic left/right correlation. So it could be interesting times which might let you guys be ahead of a lot more places.

Well, I'm weird in being from northeast Texas so you'd expect redneck ignorance, but I was raised by a flower child turned 80's era goth in a really liberal section of the state, to the point it was a surprise to find out how conservative most of the state actually is. I've just been in Memphis for 13 years due to meeting a wonderful young lady online who happened to be here, but yeah... the political landscape here is pretty damn depressing. My representative at one point was Marsha Blackburn, the woman who took up the torch for an abortion ban after Trent "the incidents of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low" Franks was too busy trying to get the taste of shoe out of his mouth to handle it.

I mean, yeah, he didn't manage to pull an Akin, but that's pretty damn close, and Blackburn happily went along with it, so when I say "us" I just mean "this area I live in" rather than say, "this group of people I am a part of and agree with on any issues" or whatnot.

Haven't libertarians already broken the alingment? Socially liberal (kind of), fiscally conservative?

That's the big-L Libertarians as in the party, which is very ironic. The anarchist writers and such from the late 1800's often used the term libertarian because anarchist publications were outlawed.

Then you started getting people who were mad about the word liberal being used for new deal policies and started using libertarian instead and even flirted with trying to make anarchist-friendly capitalism briefly, which wound up being the closest I've ever come to agreeing with that piece of shit Ayn Rand, making me even angrier at them and their repeating of the whole "people fucking over the use of a word for their own movement" thing since what we call "libertarian" over here is just the inbred offspring of the social conservatives and fiscal conservatives that figure if they jump up and down screaming "MUH FREEDOM" loud enough nobody will bother to point out what the word originally meant, just like "liberal" policies being the institution of a welfare system sounds absurd to anyone not from the states.

As for a full on break/realignment, it didn't work out well for Teddy did it?

[Flying Dice]

Let's set aside Shillary and Scrooge McTrump for what really matters: mocking ideological extremists in the most overblown, obnoxious way possible.

University of Chicago has slain Trigger Warnings!
University of Chicago has slain Censorship!
Double Kill!
University of Chicago has slain Safe Spaces!
Triple Kill!

Mom, get my Macbook, I need to blog about this!

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

I agree with that letter, mostly. I get that there are bad things, and isms, and awful things that are said. But we can't stop people just by censoring them. Free speech and all. And it won't solve anything to just plug your ears and ignore bad things. That's only treating the symptoms. And it's an Armokdamn university! Those things are supposed to be bastions of independent, free thought! The only way to preserve that is to allow anyone to speak. No matter how uncomfortable or angry some people make you feel.

Now, slurs and threats? That's different. I can support restrictions on those when possible. But absolutely nothing more than that.

[mainiac]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

What is a "safe space", exactly?

[Sergarr]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

Yeah, the society would totally be a better place if we were to segregate outselves into a set of groups based on identity and limit all interactions between them on a basis of a progressive and forward-thinking paradigm "separate but equal".

[SalmonGod]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

Yeah, the society would totally be a better place if we were to segregate outselves into a set of groups based on identity and limit all interactions between them on a basis of a progressive and forward-thinking paradigm "separate but equal".

I don't really know much about the whole "safe space" thing... but it sounds like it boils down to a slight variation on having respect for people's ability to have a private conversation.  Since when is that unreasonable?

[mainiac]

That is ridiculous sergarr.

What is a "safe space", exactly?

A place you can discuss a topic free of unpleasant consequences. So redpill is an example for the alt right.

[Sergarr]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

Yeah, the society would totally be a better place if we were to segregate outselves into a set of groups based on identity and limit all interactions between them on a basis of a progressive and forward-thinking paradigm "separate but equal".

I don't really know much about the whole "safe space" thing... but it sounds like it boils down to a slight variation on having respect for people's ability to have a private conversation.  Since when is that unreasonable?

It's unreasonable when people start to appropriate public university spaces to do this sort of thing. Which is basically what all infamous "safe spaces" have been about. Nobody would care if they had their "safe spaces" in privately owned places.

[SalmonGod]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

Yeah, the society would totally be a better place if we were to segregate outselves into a set of groups based on identity and limit all interactions between them on a basis of a progressive and forward-thinking paradigm "separate but equal".

I don't really know much about the whole "safe space" thing... but it sounds like it boils down to a slight variation on having respect for people's ability to have a private conversation.  Since when is that unreasonable?

It's unreasonable when people start to appropriate public university spaces to do this sort of thing. Which is basically what all infamous "safe spaces" have been about. Nobody would care if they had their "safe spaces" in privately owned places.

Depends on the nature of that appropriation.  Organizations with agendas appropriate university space for various purposes, including casual members-only meeting and discussion, all the damn time.

I'm pretty solidly lumping this into the category "Shit previous generations took for granted, but millennials can't try to also have without being mocked for it"

[mainiac]

To be fair there was backlash in the past too. For instance Kent state was downright hostile towards the youth intellectuals.

[Rolepgeek]

Safe spaces=good and fine.
Content Warnings=Good and fine (literally zero reason to call them trigger warnings other than to signal tribe allegiance)
Censorship of controversial speakers=fucked up
Refusing to educate on certain topics=fucked up
Lying to people you've been paid to educate=fucked up


Avoid the last three when they crop up, and the first two are just fine.

EDIT: "With us or against us" should not be the strategy/lesson learned from the Bush administration.

[penguinofhonor]

You might want to to call them trigger warnings to link them to the existing concept of psychological triggers. But anyone who doesn't agree with you is probably just being a partisan sheep.

[Flying Dice]

When you kill safe spaces you aren't protecting free speech. You are telling people who want to have a discussion under a certain paradigm to fuck off. It is exactly the same as intelligent design. Some discussions only take place if you don't invite the trolls into the room.

Yeah, the society would totally be a better place if we were to segregate outselves into a set of groups based on identity and limit all interactions between them on a basis of a progressive and forward-thinking paradigm "separate but equal".

I don't really know much about the whole "safe space" thing... but it sounds like it boils down to a slight variation on having respect for people's ability to have a private conversation.  Since when is that unreasonable?

It's unreasonable when people start to appropriate public university spaces to do this sort of thing. Which is basically what all infamous "safe spaces" have been about. Nobody would care if they had their "safe spaces" in privately owned places.

This is the problem in question. Safe spaces in the original sense are good. "Safe spaces" where you stake out public space and shout at people while refusing to allow them to speak back aren't.

Spoiler: This is a safe space. (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: This is a "safe space". (click to show/hide)

Note that the University of Chicago has, among other things, a safe space building for LGBTQ students and faculty. This is clearly targeted at the attempts to stifle free speech and intellectual discourse.