Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The SJW thread The SJW thread

02-01-2017 , 04:47 PM
Do you know why businesses were vilified? Do you think people just got together and went: "I hate those businessmen, they have all the money lets **** with them!" No, those regulations where put into place because when you focus on profits over everything else everything else tends to get **** on.
02-01-2017 , 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
The cluelessness of your questions demonstrates the very things I am saying.

I am not commenting more.
I don't think you should run away from this, because many of the posters like Well Named identify as SJW (or re-appropriate the term), but they are what I would affectionately call social justice advocates. They argue honestly and do not try to smear and lie about other posters. I cannot imagine them taking part in a "Twitter storm" to get someone fired. I honestly don't think they spend much time arguing with what you (and sometimes I) would call SJW's, because they're pretty much on the "same side."

I've been trying to get to the bottom of this too, how to define what you and I agree is a big problem, and what they tend to think is just inevitable noise I suppose.
02-01-2017 , 04:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbaseball
This is my only political motivation. So when some douchebag tells me that means I am a racist, homophobic, misogynistic fascist then I just roll my eyes at their total and complete ignorance and disregard anything and everything they have to say.
Agree 100%. I wonder what the avg hourly rate is for a SJW? There has to be an underlying financial factor causing their unhappiness (constant screaming/whining/etc).
02-01-2017 , 04:55 PM
This whole thread is people screaming and whining about SJW's.
02-01-2017 , 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by onesickdegen
Agree 100%. I wonder what the avg hourly rate is for a SJW? There has to be an underlying financial factor causing their unhappiness (constant screaming/whining/etc).
Scalzi is one of the better known SJWs and he's a successful author, maybe it has nothing to do with unhappiness and more to with respecting other people and standing up for people being attacked by racist bigoted *******s?
02-01-2017 , 05:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Scalzi is one of the better known SJWs and he's a successful author, maybe it has nothing to do with unhappiness and more to with respecting other people and standing up for people being attacked by racist bigoted *******s?
How many Syrian refugees is Mr. Skalzi taking in and protecting from the bigoted capitalists?
02-01-2017 , 05:11 PM
How many are you denying entrance to until they are fully vetted?
02-01-2017 , 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
How many are you denying entrance to until they are fully vetted?
100% of the world get denied until fully vetted. Duh.
02-01-2017 , 05:15 PM
Even the white people?
02-01-2017 , 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Even the white people?
Especially them lol
02-01-2017 , 05:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Even the white people?
I'm not sure of any predominantly white country that bans Jews from entering tho. You may wanna fact check.
02-01-2017 , 06:07 PM
I don't care much about 'SJWs' or the 'anti-SJWs' as defined and depicted in this thread.

But I will say I am very opposed to Obnoxious Fake Liberals, or OFLs. It seems there is some overlap between SJWs and OFLs, so I can understand if some anti-SJW's have distaste for SJW's, but really a lot of that is just OFLs being so obnoxious that they give SJWs a bad rap.

If someone says 'Lena Dunham is a racist obnoxious human and that type of person being on -my side- of the two-party system, and a vocal public one no less, kind of sucks".... and YOU take offense to that? You might be an OFL.
02-01-2017 , 06:08 PM
Do you just spend all day making up stupid labels for people?
02-01-2017 , 06:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoldnDark
I don't think you should run away from this, because many of the posters like Well Named identify as SJW (or re-appropriate the term), but they are what I would affectionately call social justice advocates. They argue honestly and do not try to smear and lie about other posters. I cannot imagine them taking part in a "Twitter storm" to get someone fired. I honestly don't think they spend much time arguing with what you (and sometimes I) would call SJW's, because they're pretty much on the "same side."

I've been trying to get to the bottom of this too, how to define what you and I agree is a big problem, and what they tend to think is just inevitable noise I suppose.
He's running away because the second people gave him thoughtful answers that required him to in turn respond with thoughtful answers of his own he decided it was better to peace out.
02-01-2017 , 06:26 PM
No, it's just that I've spent a lot of energy spelling out all my arguments in those videos, and I don't feel like I have the will to do it all again.

Maybe in a week or so, but not right now. My arguments are all there in video form if anyone REALLY wants to know my thinking. If not, you'll have to wait.
02-01-2017 , 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
This seems like a pretty "SJW" thing to say, doesn't it? Hyperbolic, dismissive, etc. But this is presumably not damaging discourse?
I'm not looking to silence anyone, ban them, ruin their lives via social media, etc. That doesn't preclude me from understanding what they are.

I'm happy to have an honest discussion with anyone who is willing. I don't see much of that here. If you're different, then let's discuss.
02-01-2017 , 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
Sorry, but this post is completely irrational. If the hard left pushes you so far to the right that you almost voted for Trump, then I ask why the hard right isn't pushing you towards the left. Do you just ignore the amazingly terrible things said by the hard right? Or do you agree with those things? If you don't agree, why does one annoy so much more than the other?

Sure, I can see getting annoyed at liberals who constantly attack liberals, especially when their arguments are bad. I can't imagine that I would ever abandon my own beliefs because of the bad behavior of a few (or even many) liberals. How well grounded in logic could my beliefs be if I ditch them simply because I get annoyed?
I despise the right wingers and Trump in particular. There is nothing short of a come to Jesus moment for him to win my vote. If he reverted back to the guy who used to go on Howard Stern, that would be a start.

I consider Hillary to be not much better. I was voting for the SCOTUS bc I'm terrified what 2 or 3 more conservatives will do. If not for that,i would have voted third party.
02-01-2017 , 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
He's running away because the second people gave him thoughtful answers that required him to in turn respond with thoughtful answers of his own he decided it was better to peace out.


I listened to a few of his utube videos and the guy has actually put a lot of thought into this. He actually sounds pretty smart, maybe a college professor? I hope he argues his ideas, I'd like to see some of your counters, esp WN and OriP.
02-01-2017 , 06:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I'd draw a hard distinction between the rational sceptics who identify as anti-SJWs and the alt right.

You are describing the alt right.
So, to get it straight, there's SJWs, anti-SJWs, and the alt-right who are anti-SJWs but different to anti-SJWs, and it's the alt-right who were driven to their position of voting in Trump by the SJWs? Do the alt-right who voted for Trump also believe in equality and such?
02-01-2017 , 06:57 PM
Nope, because the sort of anti-SJW that people like FoldnDark or myself represent are more in the tradition of classical liberalism

SJWs offend our sense of liberty with their often bullying and oppressive behaviour.

You should try watching some videos. This one is a good one to start with: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4du9pjsJKn0 (not one of mine)

Or if you want something VERY short, how about those Halloween protests at Yale? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QqgNcktbSA

If you defend those people's behaviour, you are defending SJW behaviour.
02-01-2017 , 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Nope, because the sort of anti-SJW that people like FoldnDark or myself represent are more in the tradition of classical liberalism

SJWs offend our sense of liberty with their often bullying and oppressive behaviour.

You should try watching some videos. This one is a good one to start with: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4du9pjsJKn0 (not one of mine)

Or if you want something VERY short, how about those Halloween protests at Yale? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QqgNcktbSA

If you defend those people's behaviour, you are defending SJW behaviour.
So, if the alt-right that voted in Trump don't have core values like equality, it sort of fits that they'd vote in a candidate who fits that mould (Trump) regardless of what SJWs say or do. They're just voting in accordance with their actual values and not as some kind of rebellion to anything.
02-01-2017 , 07:06 PM
I don't really care about the alt right vote because I'm mostly talking about normal, everyday people.

The sort of person who voted for Obama 4 years ago and Trump last year.

Do not underestimate the extent to which normal people dislike this sort of thing.
02-01-2017 , 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
The sort of person who voted for Obama 4 years ago and Trump last year.
The available evidence suggests this is a fairly small group of people, although an important group in 2016 given their geographic distribution and the electoral college. Certainly it's an interesting group of people to discuss, but it's not overwhelmingly large nor have I seen much evidence that they were motivated primarily by "anti-SJW" sentiments.

But, beyond that, the strange thing about the argument that these voters were persuaded to vote for Trump in opposition to SJWs is that it ignores the question of why they weren't disinclined to vote for Trump based on opposition to the alt-right?
02-01-2017 , 07:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I don't really care about the alt right vote because I'm mostly talking about normal, everyday people.

The sort of person who voted for Obama 4 years ago and Trump last year.

Do not underestimate the extent to which normal people dislike this sort of thing.
You are conflating both your views and the average Fox news viewer as "normal" when this is not true or supported by any study or statistic.
Do you believe the "SJW" crowd to be much larger than the alt right?
Do you believe the amount of people to vote against people who are for social justice larger than the amount who voted against white nationalism, racism and xenophobia?
How many people do you think had this as a top 5 issue?

These are all and have been quantified, by the way.
02-01-2017 , 07:32 PM
I gave you my full analysis of the Trump victory before. Do you really want to rehash it?

I wrote this on November 16th:

Quote:
After a full week of consuming post-election analysis, here are some things I think need addressing:

1. People are silo-ed both in terms of being part of online communities that only speak to their own echo chambers, and physically, that is, in terms of not being a part of meaningful local communities. Heterogeneity and diversity, so championed for so long, have actually had the effect of driving people apart. Some effort should be made to bring people together.

2. The slow death of paid print media is a bad thing with bad consequences. We talked about polling data, but there were fewer polls than four years ago or eight years ago, because people haven't been paying for news, and so there is no money to pay for such things. Local newspapers which would have picked up on disaffected communities much more vocally in the past no longer exist.

3. Facebook and twitter are not news sites and should not be substituting for them while their algorithms have no filter for accuracy. There should be pressure on those companies to filter only creditable sources. The phrase "post-factual" has done the rounds enough, let it end now. Although how this is done is a complex question in itself.

4. Meaningful political debate is circumvented by the dogmatic and unreflective application of political correctness. This is becoming a major barrier to progress because it is so spectacularly ineffective. It has had a net negative effect on the very causes for which it has so righteously strived. It has a long track record of pissing people off. That needs to be replaced by common sense and intelligence in all areas. Racism, sexism and so on are bad. We must show they are bad and why, not get in stupid debates about policing language and the freedom of speech. That's too easy a deflection tool for the right. Racism is still a huge problem and the wide-scale efforts to combat it have clearly not worked. So rather than doubling down, maybe try something different?

5. Negative campaigning is still actually not that effective. Many of the Trump voters if you listen to them voted because he promised hope and change, not because he called Hillary a nasty woman, but despite of it. Meanwhile, the Democrats' relentlessly negative campaign on the other side focusing on how unfit he was for office, had the opposite effect in many cases, making Trump seem like a forbidden fruit.

6. A poor economy is still the chief driver of populism. The rust belt states in microcosm have not done well. A job that made you middle class in 1980 puts you just above the breadline now, wages have not increased with inflation. Nothing has replaced old industry. The pervading feeling that time has left them behind is something that can't be glossed over with talk of social issues. These areas, as well as corresponding old industrial areas in Europe need something. The Full Monty came out in 1997, that was 20 years ago. What has changed? What has helped them out? It is not helped if they are called "whites", and this specific issue is made racial. The economic base comes first and the other stuff follows. Food is the first thing, morals follow on.
I wrote this on November 18th:

Quote:
I think I've come across the most cogent critique of the problems with social progressivism over the past few years: it has treated identity politics as the most important thing when in fact it is one of the least important things. It has focused on ensuring that everyone's feelings are protected rather than on ensuring that everyone's rights are protected. I absolutely agree with that assessment. Rights are more important than feelings, and actual politics are more important than identity politics.
I stand by my assessments entirely.

      
m