Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 182

Thread: Billi vs the World

  1. #21
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    I'm asking for an example because you keep speaking in generalities, like there's this foregone conclusion that all universities are now just this left-wing hellscape, the existence (and success) of groups like Turning Point USA being notably ignored. A dictionary definition of political correctness is an example of a definition, not an example of this "being shoved down someone's throat." Beyond that, you mentioned this in relation to CRT, which the whole controversy there is that supposedly this is all being taught in public schools prior to college/university.

    My main point is that I think the media you consume is leading you to believe that the woke left has taken over all schooling from preschool to graduate school and that you're uncritically believing that. I don't doubt that there are instances of things happening, just like there are instances of teachers telling their students that vaccines are demonic and that Trump won in 2020.

    Speaking of definitions, what's your definition of cancelled? What criticism is okay? If I choose not to spend money on a movie because I find it offensive, am I participating in cancel culture? What if I tell other people that I feel that way? What's the line there? I feel like under your definition I have to support everything no matter what it is or else I'm part of cancel culture.

    Who's hunting rednecks? Are they being hunted for sport? Lynched? Eaten? What hunting is happening?

    But besides that, your definition of privilege is not what people are talking about when they talk about privilege. Privilege in this context doesn't mean "all white people are successful and rich." It means that, as a general rule, white people have fewer disadvantages for a given socio-economic level than non-white people. For example, a rich white person is probably not likely to be treated the same as Salehe Gembury was for a jaywalking offense in Beverly Hills. A poor white person is less likely to get pulled over for a pretext traffic stop. Here in LA, there was just an article showing that Hispanic people on bikes were massively more likely to get stopped and searched/interrogated by LASD than other races. Privilege does not mean that you are rich and successful by default if you're white and you have no chance to be rich and successful if you're not. It just means that there's a structure in place that tends to make it harder for non-white people to be successful than white people. The existence of a poor white person does not contradict that, just like the presence of a rich black person doesn't contradict that.

    As far as KR's victims go, the problem here is that they never got a chance to defend themselves in court. We don't know their thinking and we can never know their thinking. They may have thought they were protecting the crowd from a maniac with a gun. We'll never know. But there is a *huge* difference between verdicts and facts. Verdicts are judgment calls made by humans. Facts are...well...facts. There is no such thing as an "alternative fact." There may be alternative interpretations of facts, but facts are facts.

    To me, though, diversity and tolerance doesn't mean that everyone's opinions are equally valid. Part of the marketplace of ideas is that ideas can come from everyone, but it also means that some ideas are shit and will be pushed out by the marketplace. You don't deserve a seat at the table just because you have an idiotic hot take.

    And yes. All vigilantes should stay at home. Vigilantes are bad. We have trained and uniformed people who are empowered by the state to enforce the law. Having randos with guns out there is bad.

    Speaking of, the "roof Koreans" were brought up in the other thread. I did a little research into what happened during the riots. Four people were killed in Koreatown during that. Two of them are unsolved (to the extent that they have no idea if the people killed were looting or just happened to be there), but in the other two deaths, they were people killed by friendly fire from people defending their businesses. One was a security guard, the other was someone coming to assist their family/friends in defending the store.

    Vigilantism is *bad*. Full stop. An insured storefront can be rebuilt. Those lives can't.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,606
    Canada is certainly way more extreme than us... so the best example would be when Canadian government tried to compel certain pronouns be used, that's when Jordan Peterson bulked and that's how he got famous actually. It is pretty clear that even the American left views Peterson as some sort of homophobe for refusing to bend to the 'correct' use of pronoun. Do you believe it's correct to enact such laws to tell people proper usage of pronouns?

    As for differences between criticism vs cancellation... naturally it's a critics' job to do their reviews... so our focus is purely from consumer point of view... we are definitely within our rights to not financially reward people who we don't like and stop doing business with them. However, if somebody loses his job or got their contract terminated earlier than expected... then I'd consider that cancellation. I have no problems with 'cancellations' if this person got convicted of crime or something, but people shouldn't be cancelled just because the mob is big enough. If consumers are upset enough to stop paying which cause that person's job to be terminated... that's fine. I'm okay with that. I'm just not okay with preemptive cancelling to cater to the demands of the mob. For sure Chappelle and Peterson are not cancelled, but what do you think happened to Al Franken? Just retired?

    We need to allow proper due process, not just go along with the mob.

    Regarding privilage, yes, I do agree color of our skin matters very little now. One needs to be rich to be privileged. So poor white people really should be able to celebrate their color of the skin without being viewed as white supremacists, right?

    Regarding our recent trials, yes, dead people won't get a chance to defend themselves. Fortunately we have video footage. I think I'm with the jurors. Please don't go chasing aggressively when you see people you don't like. Because you'll either wound up dead or be found guilty. Best thing to do is to both stay home. If you really need to protest, then please don't cause property damages. If you want to play white vigilante or heroic protester, then you better not be chasing anybody down. If you don't let people run away safely, be prepared to die in self defense or be found guilty and be locked up.

    To me, though, diversity and tolerance doesn't mean that everyone's opinions are equally valid. Part of the marketplace of ideas is that ideas can come from everyone, but it also means that some ideas are shit and will be pushed out by the marketplace. You don't deserve a seat at the table just because you have an idiotic hot take.
    Of course not everything is equally valid. If you truly want a 'market' place, then let the market decide... If you are a market owner, you can't just decide for the market preemptively who's worthy to be in the market place. Are you CCP or something? And are shoppers really that stupid and can't figure out this vendor is selling shit that we need you to help them decide what is shit and what is not?

    Market is usually not that stupid.

    I think our market is fucked because we only have 2 vendors both selling us different kind of shit. But my shit is better than your shit?

    Maybe China knows best? They know the correct path for all Chinese people... and people and ideas that disagree with the CCP can just disappear into the sewage because they are all shit anyways?

    If you don't believe in the absolute morality from God, then at least let market decide what stays and what goes. Those in power should not decide who's worthy of a seat in the market place or not.

    Now, I think shit is probably not a very good adjective... is this product shit because it sucks or because it's just down right fraudulent? If the vendor is clearly cheating and fraudulent, then I suppose you can take away his seat in the market. However, I'd like to see a conviction of some kind proving that the vendor is selling ponzi scheme!

    However, when it comes to ideas... sometimes that's just hard to prove.

    I can't prove Jesus exists... and you can't prove Jesus does't exist. When this happens, naturally Jesus still deserves a seat... just as with any other religions.

    Are all religions equally valid? Of course not..., but let's just let the market decide the fate of those different ideas... because none of us know what's really 'correct' with absolute certainty.

    I don't believe the CCP single party model is correct. US's 2 party system isn't right either, but it's better.

    I hope we can further improve upon that.

    From a financial point of view, 'free market' capitalism really works. China clearly showed us that they collectively got richer by adopting the free market approach. I believe ideas can work the same way. Of course socialism works too. I don't believe the two are mutually exclusive. Government's job is to help people in trouble to get better..., but not to tell people what to do and what to think.
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; November 29th, 2021 at 02:05 PM.

  3. #23
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    I'm not 100% clear on what happened with Peterson. I just read up on it and it sounds like a lot of him mischaracterizing the bill (I mostly see that if he continued to refuse the requested pronoun after being ordered by a court to use it, he could be held in contempt, and that the entire scenario was "extremely unlikely") and playing the victim. I do think refusing to use the requested pronoun unless essentially they asked nicely without "a chip on their shoulder" sounds like being a massive asshole, and yes, to me that sounds transphobic. I think it's reasonable to enact some laws - public institutions should use preferred pronouns - but of course I don't think that people shouldn't be required to use them in their private lives.

    I know some trans people. Coming out as trans is not something they took lightly, and them being trans was most definitely not a choice. They did so fearing being ostracized and often at significant personal loss. I cannot come up with a reason to not use their preferred pronouns other than you just want to be a massive asshole. I will also say that for the people who came out when I knew them, I often used the wrong pronoun. They were never mad about it, because I wasn't doing it to be a dick, it was just an honest mistake. It's easy to tell which angle someone is coming from. But, I digress.

    Onto cancellation: What if someone loses their job because the outrage they created just becomes too much of a liability to the company? Once you have signed on somewhere or taken a job, can you just do whatever you want without fear or retribution because that'd be cancellation? Do I think Al Franken should have resigned? Probably not. Was he cancelled? I'm still reading interviews with him and he's still out there in the public eye, going on tour, so I'd say no. He just lost that job. I lost my job for accidentally pushing something to production that was a little crude at best. That wasn't cancellation - I became a liability to my company and I lost my job. I'm still doing good, it was a momentary setback that I brought upon myself. I cannot think of anybody who is truly cancelled (other than people killed) outside of folks like Harvey Weinstein, where they aren't cancelled because of a potentially offensive view but because they're criminals. You might make a case for Roseanne Barr, though I would argue that spouting Q nonsense deserves a little cancellin'.

    For what it's worth, due process applies to the law. You don't get due process being kicked out of someone's house, or a bar, or losing your job, or losing a friend, or whatever. There's no such thing as due process for that.

    Onto the marketplace: If the market decides you suck and you get cancelled, isn't that part of the marketplace? Isn't that the marketplace deciding? If not, who decided it? There are little tiny boycotts all the time (I've been boycotting AT&T as best I can since the early 2000's), but it's only when there's enough genuine "fuck this person" response that you get what you're calling "cancellation". And of course a market owner gets to decide that! That's part of their own freedom of speech. Nobody has to allow any idiot on their airwaves/stream/on a soapbox in their store.

    So here's where I'll agree with you. The market is not usually that stupid. That's why "cancel culture" exists. The market's had enough of intolerant assholes.
    Last edited by Tom Servo; November 29th, 2021 at 03:21 PM.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,606
    Iím no legal expert, but Peterson was either actually right about being compelled to speak Ďcorrectlyí or they were just passing a toothless law trying to make a minority group feel better? Either way, itís not a very good law. Assuming Peterson mischaracterized, that law doesnít really compel anythingÖ That is actually the essence of what is wrong with PC. Itís fake niceness. You make it appear that youíre nice to the marginalized, but youíre not really doing anything of real substance to help. Just like fake Christians can always pray for you without lifting a finger to help.

    Onto cancellation, I donít think anyone would actually defend Harvey, right? Some cases are just so black and white. Just as nobody in their right mind would defend blue live and say George Floydís life donít matter. In gray area cases, people can just agree to disagree.

    Point is i donít believe in market manipulation. When itís not genuine market forces causing this change in market, then I think itís wrong. Problem is this is never very obvious. Remembered the day when CA has power shortages and Enron was blaming our stupid liberal state for not building enough power plants? Also during the financial crisis, we couldnít even find anyone to blame!

    I think the only thing we really need to regulate is fraud and cheatsÖ and punish them severely so that it wonít happen again. We donít need laws enacted to help people feel better. We only need laws to protect people from getting ripped off! Obviously GOP donít protect consumers that much, but Obama admin wasnít doing that great in that respect too, right?

    If you want to act PC and pray for others, thatís fine, but donít enact any laws regarding those things. Be nice for the sake of being nice. We can have laws protecting people from assholes I suppose. Make sure the laws are enforcible and can truly protect people!

    I donít believe Peterson or chappelle are hateful assholes. If you donít like them, thatís coolÖ but you donít need to hate them for sure.
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; November 29th, 2021 at 06:13 PM.

  5. #25
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    That's the thing - the market is the market. If there are stronger market forces that manipulate the market, that's still the market. I personally fall on the side that regulation is important, but I feel like you believe that the market should sort itself, but then get mad when it sorts itself in a way that you don't like. Enron got itself to that point via the unregulated market. Those are "genuine" market forces. Monopolies and oligarchies are "genuine" market forces, and why we've had the power structures we've had for millennia. It's only recently that there's been a concerted effort to level the playing field.

    I don't hate Peterson or Chappelle. I, as a general rule, like Chappelle, though I think he's going down a misguided path. I think Peterson is an asshole. I think that *they* hate people, I don't hate them.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,606
    Regulations are definitely needed. We canít have zero check and balancesÖ however, I just donít want regulators stifle the market with excessive red tape. Main objective of regulators is to detect fraud and punish appropriately. Not to tell the market what to do.

    Also, beside stamping out fraud, monopolies and oligarchies/dictators, ďgamblingĒ speculators can definitely be a threat to free market too. If the market is no longer behaving to normal supply/demand, then itís not free anymore. If itís manipulated, itís by definition no longer free. I donít think we need to allow whatever outside forces to mess with the market.

    Anyway, obviously we are wearing different political lensesÖ

    So may I ask why you think Peterson is a hateful person or why is he an asshole?
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; November 29th, 2021 at 08:54 PM.

  7. #27
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    Pretty sure I already went through that. If you purposely refer to trans people by a pronoun they've asked you not to because you think they "have a chip on their shoulder", I think you're an asshole. "Dance for me, or I call you what I want no matter how it makes you feel." I do not see any way that's not about just being a bullying asshole.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,606
    I think you are mischaracterizing Jordan Peterson. He has no problems not being an asshole by referring to someone with whatever pronoun the person wishes. His main beef was with government enacting laws compelling him to say the Ďcorrectí things.

    https://youtu.be/44pERGAaKHw
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; November 29th, 2021 at 09:38 PM.

  9. #29
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    When asked in September 2016 if he would comply with the request of a student to use a preferred pronoun, Peterson said "it would depend on how they asked me.… If I could detect that there was a chip on their shoulder, or that they were [asking me] with political motives, then I would probably say no.…
    "Dance for me" bullying.

  10. #30
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,583
    Okay, I watched that video. He's a bigger piece of shit than I thought. He's straight up arguing against legislation that he misunderstands on the backs of other people. He's willing to disrespect and bully other people in a protest over a law he doesn't fully understand.

    What a fucking asshole. Even if he's right and the law makes him use certain language, he's still targeting people who aren't responsible in his protest. Absolutely bullying nonsense.
    Last edited by Tom Servo; November 29th, 2021 at 09:43 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •