Print

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

[Vector]

"Stop being fucktards towards women," said the government.  "Hell, stop being assholes towards everyone.  We'll pay extra money to authors who write strong female characters, especially for children.  We're tired of women being portrayed as weak and spineless, alive only to serve the physical and psychological needs of men.  We're going to hire more female teachers and professors, and also people of color, so that those groups will have positive role models somewhere.  We're going to provide extra encouragement for women in schools, rather than quietly dissuading them the way we usually do."

Thus democracy fell forever, and the United States lost its identity as a world power.

I'm sorry, but I will not condemn an idea, even an evil one. Once you start condemning ideas, it is only a matter of time untill the rest go with it.

Once you start making the slippery slope fallacy, it's only a matter of time before it sneaks into every aspect of your thought.

Also, win

[Virex]

Any western society is deeply into suppressing child pornography and I am not living in a dystopia because the government started limiting the freedom of everyone one step at a time starting at child rapists. I would dare to say that I'm living in a dystopia exactly because the government has only limited itself to (child) rapists (and in the case of the US, communists)

[Argembarger]

Or, alternatively, you don't leave it up to the government to solve these problems and you combat bigotry and hatred where you find it individually and hope others do the same.

The phenomena of oppressive regimes cannot be linked to the suppression of ideas because those regimes, by their very nature, have lots of power. Which corrupts.

Correlation =/= causation, and all that.

[G-Flex]

Sometimes social problems require widespread social intervention that individuals aren't capable of, because the problem is systemic. See: Racial integration in the American south.

[Aqizzar]

Fuck, ninja.

Or, alternatively, you don't leave it up to the government to solve these problems and you combat bigotry and hatred where you find it individually and hope others do the same.

The phenomena of oppressive regimes cannot be linked to the suppression of ideas because those regimes, by their very nature, have lots of power. Which corrupts.

Yes, it corrupts every single time right?  The Civil Rights Act was a matter of impatience, better left to individual social education.

This thread is genuinely painful to read.  It's an endless litany of Pollyannish and/or aggrieved platitudes, with everyone demanding irrefutable factual evidence of human nature from everyone else.

[Argembarger]

whaa? I wouldn't call the American Government at the time of the passing of the Civil Rights Act an "oppressive regime"...

EDIT: Maybe to the people who enjoyed committing the acts that the Civil Rights Act was trying to prevent; but that's like saying we shouldn't pass criminal laws because criminals might feel oppressed...

DOUBLE-EDIT MOBIUS REACHAROUND: I was going to add to my oppressive regimes post a comment about governments that are held accountable by their people but I decided not to because I figured that would be a given.

[Aqizzar]

...you don't leave it up to the government to solve these problems ... by their very nature, have lots of power. Which corrupts.

This is why it's a dumb argument, and I hate it when people spout of "power corrupts" like it means something.  You don't get to pick and choose which historical examples you want a supposedly universal truism to apply to, especially in the span of two sentence with no qualifiers.

[Virex]

The phenomena of oppressive regimes cannot be linked to the suppression of ideas because those regimes, by their very nature, have lots of power. Which corrupts.

Pretty much all oppressive regimes have also been run exclusively by men. Perhaps it's time to swing that around?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

"Stop being fucktards towards women," said the government.  "Hell, stop being assholes towards everyone.  We'll pay extra money to authors who write strong female characters, especially for children.  We're tired of women being portrayed as weak and spineless, alive only to serve the physical and psychological needs of men.  We're going to hire more female teachers and professors, and also people of color, so that those groups will have positive role models somewhere.  We're going to provide extra encouragement for women in schools, rather than quietly dissuading them the way we usually do."

You know what makes me angry? The government using money to bribe artists into altering their art. People being hired based on a mesured quota of required physical attributes rather than the most skilled individuals being hired and not taking any sort of unrelated trait into consideration.  Endless "encouragement programs" that don't acually have any effect and waste already thin-streched taxpayer money.

Because I don't see it. I hear all the time about women and racial minorites being kept down, I live in the South of all places, and I've never once seen either group lose oppertunities because of who they were. Not one time. Show me evidence of this, any at all, and I'll give your ideas more consideration, but otherwise I simply cannot.

Also: Alright, fine, I fell into a fallacy. It happens. Regardless, I will not deny the right of an indvidual to free speech, even if that speech is hateful in nature. It is simply what I believe to be right.

[Virex]

First show that you're not (unintentionally) blind to that. Then I'll dig up something for you.


Also the most skilled person is usually male by the definition of the men who're hiring him and the men that are self-proclaimed experts in the field. See the problem there?

[Willfor]

The phenomena of oppressive regimes cannot be linked to the suppression of ideas because those regimes, by their very nature, have lots of power. Which corrupts.

Pretty much all oppressive regimes have also been run exclusively by men. Perhaps it's time to swing that around?

Sorry, I had to improve your post.

You're welcome.

[Leafsnail]

You know what makes me angry? The government using money to bribe artists into altering their art. People being hired based on a mesured quota of required physical attributes rather than the most skilled individuals being hired and not taking any sort of unrelated trait into consideration.  Endless "encouragement programs" that don't acually have any effect and waste already thin-streched taxpayer money.

Because I don't see it. I hear all the time about women and racial minorites being kept down, I live in the South of all places, and I've never once seen either group lose oppertunities because of who they were. Not one time. Show me evidence of this, any at all, and I'll give your ideas more consideration, but otherwise I simply cannot.

Would something like this suffice?

[G-Flex]

You know what makes me angry? The government using money to bribe artists into altering their art. People being hired based on a mesured quota of required physical attributes rather than the most skilled individuals being hired and not taking any sort of unrelated trait into consideration.  Endless "encouragement programs" that don't acually have any effect and waste already thin-streched taxpayer money.

Because I don't see it. I hear all the time about women and racial minorites being kept down, I live in the South of all places, and I've never once seen either group lose oppertunities because of who they were. Not one time. Show me evidence of this, any at all, and I'll give your ideas more consideration, but otherwise I simply cannot.

Also: Alright, fine, I fell into a fallacy. It happens. Regardless, I will not deny the right of an indvidual to free speech, even if that speech is hateful in nature. It is simply what I believe to be right.

You actually think that there's no such thing as race or sex based discrimination in the United States? I'm honestly not even sure what to say to that.


Also: Yes, it's suboptimal for the government to intervene in matters of art, business, and so forth. However, do you really think art (or business) is really some kind of free-for-all lovefest where you're judged solely on the real value of what you do in the first place? Of course it isn't. Corporate interests and social antipatterns are at play constantly. The government's role is to step in to correct for those when necessary.

[Solifuge]

I don't see it. I hear all the time about women and racial minorites being kept down, I live in the South of all places, and I've never once seen either group lose oppertunities because of who they were. Not one time.

Would something like this suffice?

Leaf, that's a really ugly story... pisses me off a bit too, because I have a lot of respect for the BBC.

MSH has a point about free speech, but there is a boarder between freedom to speak your mind, and using your words to attack and defame others. Also, though people have a right to say a lot of things, other people have a right to get angry and say a lot of things right back at them... but do you really think that's an ideal way to come to an understanding?

[Argembarger]

Alright, I guess I'll say it here because I failed to say it before.

In my opinion,

Governments held accountable by their people tend not to be corrupted in ways that would bring about oppressive regimes.

Governments who hold a great deal of unchecked power over their people and are run by a few individuals can be corrupted insofar as the people running them can be corrupted.

Many governments that suppress ideas, and enforce the suppression, tend, generally and historically, to be of the latter kind.

Therefore, in my opinion, one cannot make such a clear-cut statement as "Suppression of Idea X will inevitably lead to suppression of Ideas Y and Z" without knowing the historical context, the idea in question, the people in question, the government in question, etc. etc. There are too many variables involved.

And as for suppression of art and public expression, if the majority of people don't want to see penis murals everywhere, they shouldn't have to. If they do, go ahead. If the majority of people don't want bigotism and hatred to run rampant in their society, it shouldn't be allowed to. If they do, I bet it already is.