Plus the "lordly" assertion on the matter is little more than a wedge formed on one side by a tired, replayed talk-radio style "librool" accusation. That line is not alt or new.

You should probably start to wonder why the line keeps being repeated and think about that. Still haven't dealt with the fundamental underlying issue. Pointing out that the criticism is old, does not actually deal with said criticism.

If you think my only criticism was that it's an old subject you should probably re-read my posts. Anyway, what say you: both OrP and I say the claim you made in the video re: ISIS is false. Can you substantiate it? Will you retract it?

No, because basically what happens is this.

1. Terrorist attack.

2. Man from right goes: ****S SAKE. WE WILL DESTROY! Come on, ENOUGH.

3. Man from left goes: but we should remember that many Muslims are moderates and this is just a very small fraction of people. Oh and we should take in lots of refugees too.

And the general population goes. "Huh, we'll vote for the man on the right"

Remember these images okay.

<images and text removed>


No we are not having posts that demonise groups that way

It's sadly much easier to whip up hatred and aggression than it is to keep things reasonable. We have to persist despite knowing we will fail sometimes. Civilised behaviour and reasonableness are lacquers that we have to keep laying on and renewing.

Alongside we have to work hard to prevent the problems in the first place. There's rarely any credit for terrible events that never happened - which is a shame as that's the biggest prize.

Hahaha. It's an easy type of "information"-product to vary and repeat. That is why it is old and repeated. It only lasts as information when repeated because it is the kind of "information" which becomes virtual hot air when not repeated.

How?

Fear mongering is like haunting.

Just remember them. My prediction is that this episode will kill off the left properly across Europe, in the UK and in the US.

Why expose people to manipulative fear mongering and then suggest they remember it?

It's what is going to happen. And it will happen because of the left's moral relativism when it comes to this issue specfically.

It has already near enough destroyed the Labour Party in the UK.

A prediction from stereotypes and cowardice which needs frequent repetition speaks of it own weakness, no matter how much moral relativism and partisan labeling gets name-dropped with it.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of it, it is what is going to happen.

Left needed to take a much harder stance in general, or at least be perceived to be taking a tougher stance.

The moral relativism has shown itself a lot recently in the UK with lots of people trying to stop Trump coming on his planned state visit.

LOTS of much much worse people have come on state visits -- dictators, mass murders, and so on -- who got a totally free pass, but yet now all of a sudden sexism and racism is really important.

*Most* people can see that this is rank hypocrisy. I've been listening to radio phone ins and can judge the mood of "the people". I think those for Trump coming out numbered those protesting him coming about 5 to 1, and this is LBC which is a London station with London callers.

If people think you are a hypocrite with double standards, it's kinda tough to get them to vote for you or listen to you on much at all. And this is where the left destroys itself. By making a song and dance about these things, but then being kinda silent on things like this (this -- which is the sort of thing they'll move to explain away, quash, reduce, universalise, etc., which is what they did). I give them zero chances of winning the culture war on this one. "The people" en masse will virtually ALWAYS swing right in majority on it.

Repeating the varying justification for fear mongering is it.

Also, It shows an amateur understanding of human beings to clutch pearls about hypocrisy a whole bunch.

You should stop using the term moral relativism until such time as you can use it correctly.

In what ways am I not using it correctly?

This answers it. I'd also argue that if you are going to claim that moral relativism is wrong you should have an argument as to why and I've not seen it only an erroneous attribution of MR to SJW's.

Which is part of the reason why I found this to be so fascinating.

http://www.anonymousconservative.com...itical-dialog/

Even though I vehemently want this to be wrong, by ignoring the obviously biased characterization of liberals in toto and just considering the theories in terms of observed human behavior, I'm starting to think that it might not be wrong.

Here is a quotation on this question:

For "anti-humanism" see video 1 or well named's critique of that video above.

This looks pretty interesting, I will look into this. Highly relevant for my current research.

Stephan Molyneux has some interesting casts on that subject as well as many more relative to todays wacko society

Hey, if we took those pictures from the protests ITT and replaced "immigrant" with "gay marriage" in the signs and the post, it would look like a response from an anti-LGBTQ group to a 'Support gay marriage demonstration'.

I'm not sure how that is a response to my post. Could you provide the source so I can get the context?

Alternatively you could explain to me what you mean when you claim that SJW's support Moral Relativism and do so considering well named's objection above.

Not sure why pictures of people welcoming refugees is seen as demonizing them, but Lorde, what is the better alternative? I get that people are concerned with such large numbers coming into welfare states, and I don't think those who resist this are purely xenophobic, but how does this play out in a better way?

What is ISIS now, 10,000 strong? Maybe Trump and Putin can stamp it out. But what about the hundreds of thousands of refugee kids who have lost their childhood, missed schooling, have no skills and know nothing but war? I'm not even wringing my bleeding heart, I'm asking practically is it smart to shut them out, leaving them in that middle east cesspool?

Taking them into Western societies accomplishes two important things. It prevents them growing into adolescents and adults that are very easy recruits to become Islamofascist fodder, growing a much larger and meaner ISIS than now, perpetuating bigger and bigger conflicts with no end. Also, bringing in refugees, and introducing them to liberal societies helps modernize them and hopefully their culture and religion.