Chat Forum
It is currently Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:51 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 292 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 46484
Location: In the Centre/left wing
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


Have you had a bite out of La Soule's stupid biscuit?

No I have been reading the BBC news site.
I take it you condemn these racists?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
c69 wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


Have you had a bite out of La Soule's stupid biscuit?

No I have been reading the BBC news site.
I take it you condemn these racists?


What a typically stupid thing of you to say. Of course I do and they should be punished according the laws of this land.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 46484
Location: In the Centre/left wing
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


Have you had a bite out of La Soule's stupid biscuit?

No I have been reading the BBC news site.
I take it you condemn these racists?


What a typically stupid thing of you to say. Of course I do and they should be punished according the laws of this land.

I merely asked a question, don't get so ranty.
Have a fabulous afternoon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49373
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


No excuses for them. They're a disgrace and I hope they get their just deserts.



It will be interesting to see what they've been charged with and if they'll defend that charge. Depending on the actual wording and circumstances being a racist isn't against the law.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
c69 wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


Have you had a bite out of La Soule's stupid biscuit?

No I have been reading the BBC news site.
I take it you condemn these racists?


What a typically stupid thing of you to say. Of course I do and they should be punished according the laws of this land.

I merely asked a question, don't get so ranty.
Have a fabulous afternoon.


I get "ranty" as even though you've changed your stance on a few things recently, you're still a shit thrower.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
Bokkom wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
La soule wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
The calls of a vast movement of cultural Marxists running our institutions has always rung a little conspiratorial to me.



This is DAC.

We are all leftists allowing the Muslims to take over our lands and nations with destruction and acculturation as their only goals.

There's him, then the poster with no shame and a few others like that.

They provide a distraction when they are not banned from the bored.


You are beyond idiotic.

He has definitely turned into a total joke of a poster. Once they revert to ad hominems and strawmen, it's obvious they have nothing left in the tank. Such shame, actually.



I dont know you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
Quote:
He has definitely turned into a total joke of a poster.


It's sad, but true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3207
bimboman wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


No excuses for them. They're a disgrace and I hope they get their just deserts.



It will be interesting to see what they've been charged with and if they'll defend that charge. Depending on the actual wording and circumstances being a racist isn't against the law.


I'm not familiar enough with the law to know. But I would imagine this kind of provocation comes under hate speech.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
100MileDad wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


Have you had a bite out of La Soule's stupid biscuit?


This is the problem with you right wing type.

You like to dish it out, being insulting and dismissive of others, those people you hate, because let's face it, it is hatred, only to go in some fit of anger when somebody is making a comment which differs from your sad views of the world.

And then, DAC starts a thread on Freedom of speech, only to bark at people posting contrary opinion.

Same applies to Seneca and that other guy I cant remember.

So, we are left with insults, as usual.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
100MileDad wrote:

I get "ranty" as even though you've changed your stance on a few things recently, you're still a shit thrower.


So you dont like what he is saying?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49373
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
bimboman wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
c69 wrote:
And in other news 2 students have been arrested over racist chants in Nottingham Trent University.
I suspect the politics of these guys that hate the Blacks is a bit different from the London loons.


No excuses for them. They're a disgrace and I hope they get their just deserts.



It will be interesting to see what they've been charged with and if they'll defend that charge. Depending on the actual wording and circumstances being a racist isn't against the law.


I'm not familiar enough with the law to know. But I would imagine this kind of provocation comes under hate speech.



That's what I meant by what the charge is, actually saying you don't like Black people, Chinese , white people etc while repugnant isn't illegal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:46 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14044
Location: XPAT CUNT
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
There are sacred words like diversity, safe space and free speech.


I'd be interested to know what the word "diversity" means to bored members?


Probably having a curry and a Chinese in the same week.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Oh it is DAC. It always has been and you have been one the worst proponent of that behavior, across the years.

Which you are entitled to of course.

In the same vein, I am entitled to disagree with what you stand for.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3207
bimboman wrote:
That's what I meant by what the charge is, actually saying you don't like Black people, Chinese , white people etc while repugnant isn't illegal.


Active vs passive, I guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
La soule wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Oh it is DAC. It always has been and you have been one the worst proponent of that behavior, across the years.

Which you are entitled to of course.

In the same vein, I am entitled to disagree with what you stand for.


Pray tell, what do I stand for?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 13516
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
100MileDad wrote:
La soule wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Oh it is DAC. It always has been and you have been one the worst proponent of that behavior, across the years.

Which you are entitled to of course.

In the same vein, I am entitled to disagree with what you stand for.


Pray tell, what do I stand for?


Not going there.

Again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 6251
100MileDad wrote:
La soule wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Oh it is DAC. It always has been and you have been one the worst proponent of that behavior, across the years.

Which you are entitled to of course.

In the same vein, I am entitled to disagree with what you stand for.


Pray tell, what do I stand for?


He's a twat. Ignore him. What you are doing is totally pointless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.


Wasn't that religious aggravated harrassment?

Something utterly different.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 13516
100MileDad wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.


Wasn't that religious aggravated harrassment?

Something utterly different.

Oh yes it was, I stand corrected. Would imagine it'll be along those lines though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
Santa wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
La soule wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
being insulting and dismissive of others


I'm not like that at all, you worthless know nothing moron.


Oh it is DAC. It always has been and you have been one the worst proponent of that behavior, across the years.

Which you are entitled to of course.

In the same vein, I am entitled to disagree with what you stand for.


Pray tell, what do I stand for?


He's a twat. Ignore him. What you are doing is totally pointless.


And here come the guy who think nothing should be discussed until facts have been confirmed and there is actually nothing left to discuss.

Also inclined to dish insult out, hardly ever makes a point.

A bore.

I should spend more time in those right wing thread.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49373
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:59 pm
Posts: 550
Quote:
Two 18-year-old men have been arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated public order offences


From the BBC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 13516
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.

It's a different scale of activity but I would imagine with these men shouting what they did outside the door of a black student I suspect that may be the line they go down, of harrassment. Though the reported thing they've been arrested for is "racially aggravated public order offenses".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15380
La soule wrote:

I dont really care about your insults. That's the only thing you appear to be good at nowadays.

Let's just say that I was extremely surprised to find you posting on a thread where racism/freedom of speeches etc are being discussed by the usual suspects.


This is a thread about freedom of speech. TG and you started on the racism as an infantile way of trying to bait DAC. That's at least a little bit moronic, no?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49373
unseenwork wrote:
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.

It's a different scale of activity but I would imagine with these men shouting what they did outside the door of a black student I suspect that may be the line they go down, of harrassment. Though the reported thing they've been arrested for is "racially aggravated public order offenses".



Alleged. If they knew where they were then I hope they're done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 13516
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.

It's a different scale of activity but I would imagine with these men shouting what they did outside the door of a black student I suspect that may be the line they go down, of harrassment. Though the reported thing they've been arrested for is "racially aggravated public order offenses".



Alleged. If they knew where they were then I hope they're done.

Allegedly yes indeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2780
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
The prevention of ideas reaching an audience is part of it, true. I do think there's more to no-platforming than simply preventing expression of a certain viewpoint though - even if it's being heard by a single, often fairly small audience. In practical terms they're not stopping the ultimate dissemination of said ideas - quite removed from the abiity of the state to do the same - and I think they know that. Maybe it's purely symbolic for some - for actual students of the university in question it might be the desire not to be tainted by association with the offending speaker. I think it's misguided but the motivations probably extend a bit beyond what's actually being said.

In fact, from the point of view of those protesting, and from those who invited the speaker in the first place, what the speaker actually ends up saying is probably secondary to the symbolism and displays of tribalism that the event happens to afford. From looking at the Milo episodes in the US, they had the appearance of political rallies - a type of cathartic shared experience for those with a common cause.


Yes. There's much truth to this. There are other things in play beneath the surface.

I think speakers in Unis can often become proxies for people who - for whatever reason - feel a need to act out their group memberships as ostentatiously as possible. What a speaker like Sargon of Akkad has to say isn't really that important. It's more about signalling disapproval of the group which wants to hear him: I do not belong to them; I belong to those who are different to them. So, while the content of Sargon's conversation with an objectivist will generally be a low-res riff on Burke and Locke of no actual interest to most progressives, the thing that really matters is that he offers a totem pole around which a species of war dance can be carried out, loyalties can be advertised, territories claimed.

A great deal of this, I think, is intended not so much as a signal to the speaker - although that's a happy corollary - but as a throwing down of the gauntlet to the perceived rival group who invited him/her. I notice, for example, that when a stage is stormed and a microphone grabbed, it's often the case that the subsequent messages are directed at the audience more so than the invitee. It has the quality of a territorial grab from the neighbours with whom the university space/public square is shared. Stripping an audience of their right to listen makes coherent sense when it's the gathering you have an issue with as much as the speaker.

I can't help thinking that a portion of whatever it is inside us that's geared for religion tends to get activated in these scenarios for both sides. If not religious, something similarly ancient and parallel. We see chanting. On the left, we often see activists repeating recitations made by a leader as if it were catechism. There are sacred words like diversity, safe space and free speech. There's a vocabulary reminiscent of exorcism around demons such as fascists, Nazis and the like. I think the biggest sign perhaps that there's a faith based impulse in play is the response to apostates. They're turned on more savagely than anyone else. That shouldn't be the case - or at least, not quite so much - if this was a rational process.

All in all, it points to an exercise in self demarcation through opposition to others running alongside the overt politics. I think this indicates something's profoundly lacking in how some of these people self appraise. Something they should have learned by now, hasn't been taught to them. Again though, I do think, the best way to haul us out of these atavistic pits is to insist - over and over again - on debate.


Yeah, I'd tend to agree with most of that.

I think you might be right on the religion point. A lot of this reminds me of conversations or debates with those who are true believers. Antifa are quite clearly in a quasi-religious post-debate state - i.e. the contentions and questions being discussed have been resolved in their minds and in that scenario all that's left is violence - the resort to physical force is obvious if the non-contestables - which can't be up-for-debate as they've been resolved - are threatened.

One of the really interesting aspects of all of this concerns those who are expressly non-religious - some of whom were raised in strict religious households but rebelled - yet engage in this sort of tribalism. I'm not sure of the numbers and maybe they're an outspoken minority, but the online/youtube fraternity (they're mostly male) who, circa 10-12 years ago, made up the base of "new-atheism" - these were the supporters and acolytes of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Dan Dennett - now appear to constitute a noticeable proportion of the following of the Sargons, Molyneuxs and Jordan Petersons of this world. On the one hand, there's the constant reference to being "rational" and "the science", on the other hand there's the instantly reflexive dimiunition of the "other". There's a heck of a lot of crossover amongst the followers of these youtube "personalities" and those who were probably reading The End of Faith and The Selfish Gene a couple of years ago.

So, there's the belief that one is being rational and scientific whilst being hyper-tribalistic. I naively expected, many years ago now, that the charge of "What do you replace religion with?" was something of a false dilemma - the absence or "loss" of religous faith didn't need to be replaced. One wasn't losing anything. Well, for many that clearly isn't the case. There's a void in need of filling. The Harris/Hitchens' movement led to the wayward male teen going from Christianity to hard atheism (and very often Libertarianism) and on to a fixation with evolutionary theory (Dawkins' influence) as hyper-adaptationism (see the way how so much of these sex/gender debates are framed through the lens of sexual selection), social darwinism...and back to a woolly form of Petersonian theism.

I actually read one comment after listening to a Sam Harris podcast with Peterson, which went along the lines as follows: "I used to be a big Sam Harris fan, always listening to his podcast, but I no longer feel he identifies what matters like Prof Peterson does. I now believe in God and think Sam is being repetitive and rude to Jordan and is being pedantic by arguing over Jordan's definition of truth".

I don't think for many of this cohort that anything substantive changed in their years of atheism - they simply latched on to a group they felt they identified with, and what's more a group that ran counter to those they disliked. The hatred of the "other" is far more unifying and motivational an impulse than any tendency towards reason and rationality. All of which is rather sad to be honest. They've learned nothing.


Last edited by Conservative Eddie on Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:

I dont really care about your insults. That's the only thing you appear to be good at nowadays.

Let's just say that I was extremely surprised to find you posting on a thread where racism/freedom of speeches etc are being discussed by the usual suspects.


This is a thread about freedom of speech. TG and you started on the racism as an infantile way of trying to bait DAC. That's at least a little bit moronic, no?


Fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20037
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
Which is utter bollocks. It's tiresome listen to right wingers with literally no actual keep asserting their fantasies about the teaching establishment being left wing fruitcakes


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/univ ... -zmm2nn76g

It's hardly a fantasy.


It's bollocks. Also if you want to post evidence, at least paste the paywall stuff.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15380
La soule wrote:
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:

I dont really care about your insults. That's the only thing you appear to be good at nowadays.

Let's just say that I was extremely surprised to find you posting on a thread where racism/freedom of speeches etc are being discussed by the usual suspects.


This is a thread about freedom of speech. TG and you started on the racism as an infantile way of trying to bait DAC. That's at least a little bit moronic, no?


Fine.


So Seneca was right. 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15380
eldanielfire wrote:
100MileDad wrote:
Quote:
Which is utter bollocks. It's tiresome listen to right wingers with literally no actual keep asserting their fantasies about the teaching establishment being left wing fruitcakes


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/univ ... -zmm2nn76g

It's hardly a fantasy.


It's bollocks. Also if you want to post evidence, at least paste the paywall stuff.


I'm not sure you could say it's bollocks about Evergreen and Missou for example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:

I dont really care about your insults. That's the only thing you appear to be good at nowadays.

Let's just say that I was extremely surprised to find you posting on a thread where racism/freedom of speeches etc are being discussed by the usual suspects.


This is a thread about freedom of speech. TG and you started on the racism as an infantile way of trying to bait DAC. That's at least a little bit moronic, no?


Fine.


So Seneca was right. 8)


I would not go that far.

I could have posted a picture of Barbie and he still would have thrown insults, regardless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1236
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.

It's a different scale of activity but I would imagine with these men shouting what they did outside the door of a black student I suspect that may be the line they go down, of harrassment. Though the reported thing they've been arrested for is "racially aggravated public order offenses".



Alleged. If they knew where they were then I hope they're done.


Their chants were all recorded and went on for some time, and other students can be heard asking them to stop and telling them that there is a black girl inside the room they are chanting outside. As she is apparently the only black person on that floor of the hall of residence, they may have some difficulty suggesting this was a coincidence. We shall see when this gets to Court, but I suspect they are done.

They've also been suspended from the University, and will likely be expelled once the Court case is done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11033
Lobby wrote:
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
bimboman wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
Racially aggravated harrassment quite likely, much as Fransen and Golding of Britain first were done for recently, actually came up as a point of discussion between my friends and myself just the other day.



It's so far away from Fransen and Golding who made targeted attempts to influence and attack people who were part of an active court case.

As I said it will be interesting on how targeted and if a defence of freedom of views is offered. There's of course a chance that the accusation is malicious as well.

It's a different scale of activity but I would imagine with these men shouting what they did outside the door of a black student I suspect that may be the line they go down, of harrassment. Though the reported thing they've been arrested for is "racially aggravated public order offenses".



Alleged. If they knew where they were then I hope they're done.


Their chants were all recorded and went on for some time, and other students can be heard asking them to stop and telling them that there is a black girl inside the room they are chanting outside. As she is apparently the only black person on that floor of the hall of residence, they may have some difficulty suggesting this was a coincidence. We shall see when this gets to Court, but I suspect they are done.

They've also been suspended from the University, and will likely be expelled once the Court case is done.



It is on the BBC site if you want to listen to it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nott ... e-43328566

Apparently not uncommon in Unis according to:

Quote:
Ilyas Nagdee, 23, National Union of Students officer representing students of African, Arab, Asian and Caribbean descent, said these experiences are "common".

"We've seen examples of incidents like the racist writing on bananas at Warwick, the Confederate flag at Manchester and now shouting through the door in Nottingham.

"These are just the stories that go viral over social media. But unfortunately this is the day-to-day experience of students of colour across the country and it has been going on for decades.

"I'm contacted at least a couple of times a week by students asking me for help after experiencing racism."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 13516
Conservative Eddie wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
The prevention of ideas reaching an audience is part of it, true. I do think there's more to no-platforming than simply preventing expression of a certain viewpoint though - even if it's being heard by a single, often fairly small audience. In practical terms they're not stopping the ultimate dissemination of said ideas - quite removed from the abiity of the state to do the same - and I think they know that. Maybe it's purely symbolic for some - for actual students of the university in question it might be the desire not to be tainted by association with the offending speaker. I think it's misguided but the motivations probably extend a bit beyond what's actually being said.

In fact, from the point of view of those protesting, and from those who invited the speaker in the first place, what the speaker actually ends up saying is probably secondary to the symbolism and displays of tribalism that the event happens to afford. From looking at the Milo episodes in the US, they had the appearance of political rallies - a type of cathartic shared experience for those with a common cause.


Yes. There's much truth to this. There are other things in play beneath the surface.

I think speakers in Unis can often become proxies for people who - for whatever reason - feel a need to act out their group memberships as ostentatiously as possible. What a speaker like Sargon of Akkad has to say isn't really that important. It's more about signalling disapproval of the group which wants to hear him: I do not belong to them; I belong to those who are different to them. So, while the content of Sargon's conversation with an objectivist will generally be a low-res riff on Burke and Locke of no actual interest to most progressives, the thing that really matters is that he offers a totem pole around which a species of war dance can be carried out, loyalties can be advertised, territories claimed.

A great deal of this, I think, is intended not so much as a signal to the speaker - although that's a happy corollary - but as a throwing down of the gauntlet to the perceived rival group who invited him/her. I notice, for example, that when a stage is stormed and a microphone grabbed, it's often the case that the subsequent messages are directed at the audience more so than the invitee. It has the quality of a territorial grab from the neighbours with whom the university space/public square is shared. Stripping an audience of their right to listen makes coherent sense when it's the gathering you have an issue with as much as the speaker.

I can't help thinking that a portion of whatever it is inside us that's geared for religion tends to get activated in these scenarios for both sides. If not religious, something similarly ancient and parallel. We see chanting. On the left, we often see activists repeating recitations made by a leader as if it were catechism. There are sacred words like diversity, safe space and free speech. There's a vocabulary reminiscent of exorcism around demons such as fascists, Nazis and the like. I think the biggest sign perhaps that there's a faith based impulse in play is the response to apostates. They're turned on more savagely than anyone else. That shouldn't be the case - or at least, not quite so much - if this was a rational process.

All in all, it points to an exercise in self demarcation through opposition to others running alongside the overt politics. I think this indicates something's profoundly lacking in how some of these people self appraise. Something they should have learned by now, hasn't been taught to them. Again though, I do think, the best way to haul us out of these atavistic pits is to insist - over and over again - on debate.


Yeah, I'd tend to agree with most of that.

I think you might be right on the religion point. A lot of this reminds me of conversations or debates with those who are true believers. Antifa are quite clearly in a quasi-religious post-debate state - i.e. the contentions and questions being discussed have been resolved in their minds and in that scenario all that's left is violence - the resort to physical force is obvious if the non-contestables - which can't be up-for-debate as they've been resolved - are threatened.

One of the really interesting aspects of all of this concerns those who are expressly non-religious - some of whom were raised in strict religious households but rebelled - yet engage in this sort of tribalism. I'm not sure of the numbers and maybe they're an outspoken minority, but the online/youtube fraternity (they're mostly male) who, circa 10-12 years ago, made up the base of "new-atheism" - these were the supporters and acolytes of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Dan Dennett - now appear to constitute a noticeable proportion of the following of the Sargons, Molyneuxs and Jordan Petersons of this world. On the one hand, there's the constant reference to being "rational" and "the science", on the other hand there's the instantly reflexive dimiunition of the "other". There's a heck of a lot of crossover amongst the followers of these youtube "personalities" and those who were probably reading The End of Faith and The Selfish Gene a couple of years ago.

So, there's the belief that one is being rational and scientific whilst being hyper-tribalistic. I naively expected, many years ago now, that the charge of "What do you replace religion with?" was something of a false dilemma - the absence or "loss" of religous faith didn't need to be replaced. One wasn't losing anything. Well, for many that clearly isn't the case. There's a void in need of filling. The Harris/Hitchens' movement led to the wayward male teen going from Christianity to hard atheism (and very often Libertarianism) and on to a fixation with evolutionary theory (Dawkins' influence) as hyper-adaptationism (see the way how so much of these sex/gender debates are framed through the lens of sexual selection), social darwinism...and back to a woolly form of Petersonian theism.

I actually read one comment after listening to a Sam Harris podcast with Peterson, which went along the lines as follows: "I used to be a big Sam Harris fan, always listening to his podcast, but I no longer feel he identifies what matters like Prof Peterson does. I now believe in God and think Sam is being repetitive and rude to Jordan and is being pedantic by arguing over Jordan's definition of truth".

I don't think for many of this cohort that anything substantive changed in their years of atheism - they simply latched on to a group they felt they identified with, and what's more a group that ran counter to those they disliked. The hatred of the "other" is far more unifying and motivational an impulse than any tendency towards reason and rationality. All of which is rather sad to be honest. They've learned nothing.

I would very much agree with that framing of this grouping of individuals (alt-lite? scientismists?) as the children of the New Atheists, it's how I've viewed it for some time and have seen it described that way before (though for the life of me I can't remember where).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 46484
Location: In the Centre/left wing
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:
fatcat wrote:
La soule wrote:

I dont really care about your insults. That's the only thing you appear to be good at nowadays.

Let's just say that I was extremely surprised to find you posting on a thread where racism/freedom of speeches etc are being discussed by the usual suspects.


This is a thread about freedom of speech. TG and you started on the racism as an infantile way of trying to bait DAC. That's at least a little bit moronic, no?


Fine.


So Seneca was right. 8)

Aw bless :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6755
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/o ... hSp3?amp=1

Quote:
Christina Hoff Sommers is a self-identified feminist and registered Democrat with a Ph.D. in philosophy and a wicked sense of humor. She is also a woman who says bad things. Things like: Men and women are equal, but there are differences between them. Or: The gender gap in STEM fields isn’t simply the result of sexism. Or: Contrary to received wisdom, the American school system actually favors girls, not boys.

When such a person steps foot on a college campus these days, you know what’s coming. So it was on Monday at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Ore., where Ms. Sommers had been invited by the Federalist Society to give a talk about feminism.

In advance of the lecture, nine student groups, among them the Portland National Lawyers Guild, the Minority Law Student Association, the Women’s Law Caucus, the Jewish Law Society and the school’s Young Democratic Socialists of America chapter sent a letter protesting the appearance by this “known fascist.”

The letter added that her invitation amounted to an “act of aggression and violence” and went on to offer a curious definition of free speech: “Freedom of speech is certainly an important tenet to a free, healthy society, but that freedom stops when it has a negative and violent impact on other individuals.”

Yes, these future lawyers believe that free speech is acceptable only when it doesn’t offend them. Which is to say, they don’t believe in it at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31474
Speakers' Corner could be interesting this Sunday. Martin Sellner is planning to speak there 12 noon Sunday. He's genuinely alt-right, so it could be tasty.

EDIT: And here is Antifa's call to arms:

https://www.facebook.com/events/537407219976311/

So basically they are going to 'no-platform' Speakers' Corner.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 292 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: backrow, bessantj, bonzo, booji boy, de_Selby, Doc Rob, Google Adsense [Bot], guy smiley, hermie, Hong Kong, houtkabouter, I like haggis, jdogscoop, Jensrsa, koroke hangareka, Lorthern Nights, Market Square Hero, mikeyboy123, mrbrownstone, Nieghorn, Nolanator, OomPB, OttawaKat, panamax, Petej, Petros, Raggs, redderneck, rett, Rowdy, Rugby2023, RuggaBugga, Steamin Beamin, tabascoboy, Ted., Zakar and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group