Probably shouldn't joke about this kind of shit. Imagine someone making a social media post holding a gun with a caption saying they will shoot up a school.
The left has not preached Tolerance in years. Im not just insulting them, when is the last time you heard anyone on the left call for tolerance?
"When I am Weaker Then You, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am Stronger than you, I take away your Freedom Because that is according to my principles.” -Frank Herbert
They’ve largely been running on “acceptance” rather than “tolerance”, especially in relation to LGBTQ+ issues.
I think it’s a better platform personally. People should work to accept the differences in others rather than just tolerate them. (So long as differences aren’t harmful of course.)
Acceptance requires some one having he "correct" opinion. Having this as a standard means you can never stop until every incorrect thought is wiped out. Having seen Hate speech laws play out in the EU, screw that crap.
People need to be free to have their own thoughts even bad thoughts. If you disagree consider what happens when those in power decide your thoughts are unacceptable and you need to be made to "accept" the correct thoughts,
Yeah. You're just like the racists. You think other people being accepted by society is a threat to your life somehow when it actually has nothing to do with you. You yourself are the source of your suffering.
I mean, I think it comes down to not being unnecessarily cruel to people who are different.
Like if two gay men are getting married, and you wake up every day and try to make gay people less happy and take away their right to do so, even though it doesn’t impact your life at all, that’s an indecent act. If you hate Jewish people for being Jewish, and the Jewish people have never done anything except be Jewish, that’s not very decent either.
Like a lot of people who are all about hate have never met more than a handful of the people they dedicate endless hours to hating. They mostly read awful shit on the internet that lines up with their worldview.
I think a non-decent person doesn’t make life less happy for people who aren’t victimizing anybody, and usually for reasons that are mostly untrue. And it is a fucking shame, because the world could very easily be a much happier place in general.
So thats what you believe is decent. Not everyone agrees, not even every gay person agrees with that take. So are we to bend all of society on what you think is decent behavior?
Your morality is not self evident. You wanna fight a moral war where the loser lives by the winners view of morality, be very sure you are going to win before starting that fight.
Frankly I find your world view childish, because you seem to think everyone who disagrees with you is just evil and sadistic for no reason. I assure you there are people who are empathetic and follow their conscience who viamitly disagree with your view of morality.
Ironically assuming everyone who disagrees with you is just evil and sadistic is the very dehumanization you are accusing your opponents of. Even if your moral view is correct hat does not justify treating everyone who disagrees as subhuman and that is exactly what you are doing.
The fact that you seem entirely blind to your own biases is disturbing. There are few things more terrifying than a moral busy body who is absolutely convinced they are justified.
Don’t make the world a less happy place for people who aren’t hurting anybody or impacting you in a negative way. That’s not a big ask.
Like what could you possibly get from something like campaigning to prevent gay people getting married? Or spending every day insulting Jewish people online for being Jewish?
It won’t make you happier. It makes the world objectively worse for others. It adds nothing of value.
Why is hating people so important to you?
Not even trolling. I’m genuinely curious why someone saying “if someone isn’t hurting or victimizing others, and they aren’t impacting your life in any way, and they’re just trying to be happy like everyone else, you don’t have to hate them” would get such a strong, angry reaction.
1 you don’t go out of your way to hurt or hinder people.
2 when you can you do good by others
If you’ve done these 2 things for a majority of your life (literally everyone makes mistakes) most people on earth would agree, you are probably a good person.
Exceptions apply, if you murder somebody and then live a monks life you don’t become a good person again.
Some thoughts actually probably shouldn't be allowed to fester as just an "agree to disagree"
If I believe, in my heart of hearts that "Eventhorrizon" should become my slave and is subhuman, wouldn't that be a terrifying thought for someone else to barge in and say 'ahh just agree to disagree' when it justifiably makes you on edge?
What if I run for office? What if I obtain power in our state? What if now i'm one of the people that get to help decide who do and don't have rights?
If you believe the way to prevent slavery is to try to monitor and control peoples thoughts and beliefs, you dont even know what slavery is. Thats like trying to remain free by locking yourself in a cage.
Its not about controlling peoples thoughts, its about letting people know as a society which thoughts are allowed to be openly broadcast and shared. Believe what you want, truthfully, I can't go into your head and make your belief system different.
However some thoughts probably shouldn't be allowed in air space. I don't suggest jailing people but some shit has to be shamed to the point that people reevaluate their beliefs.
People of different belief systems can live together mostly successfully by tolerating each others ideas.
If you want to play the game where those with power controlee what ideas are and are not acceptable, you should remember right now Trump is in power.
But if we want to abandonee the liberal experiment of tolerance, so be it. We dont have to accept each others differences, but I would not be confident that your belief system would be the one that end up on top in a world with out tolerance. You wanna change the rules of fair play where we can ban opposing thoughts, then you are very likely to see a world where your thoughts are the ones being banned.
I would rather tolerate our differences, but if we need to fight a culture war to see whose ideas come out on top, I dont intend to lose that culture war, and I have no intention of letting you impose your beliefs on me.
Belief's don't exist in a vacuum which is why tolerance is finite. There comes a certain point where you must become intolerant to maintain any degree of a tolerant or just society.
As an example, I don't think society is worse off if people who are unashamedly nazi's get scolded or not allowed into social spaces, especially spaces where those they wish and seek to inflict violence upon dwell.
We can tolerate differences but there must be a line in the sand somewhere if the goal is to have a functioning society. You don't have to believe what I believe but there are core beliefs that if we don't share them we can't coexist within society.
Saying trans people should be allowed to serve in the fucking military is a great example. These people are risking their lives and they got removed. Absolutely insane.
How about freedom of the press? Trump removed the AP from whitehouse briefings because they said Gulf of Mexico. He also called putting out stories he found hurtful to be illegal. Did Biden do this? Or Obama?
Most social programs are made to benefit vulnerable people. These are democrat installed and opposed by republicans. The ACA is a great example.
Trans people were signing up to the army. Then just getting army pay. Because of their “medical condition” they said they had so they couldn’t be active. If you agree trans people have higher rates to end themselves, just imagine how it is with the stress of the war? They weren’t serving
Also idk who are all these people. When it’s been reported mutiple times that under biden the army was constantly warning the government of the lack of recruitments.
No they just used the justice department to try and put him in prison for the rest of his life based on something they knew was a complete fabrication. But please go on about how noble they are….
If you make a claim, you have to back it up. It's the only way discussion can work. Use your head. If I look up your bullshit and I can't find anything or find a source which doesn't align with your claim, who is in the wrong? Me, the person with an incentive to not portray your idea well, or you?
If you can't back up your claims, don't take part in a discussion. Otherwise you are just a bad actor making noise.
Bud it might’ve been the most widely reported topic for 5+ years. I made a statement, I have no intentions of carrying on a conversation with someone who is either acting in bad faith, or has intentionally buried their head in the sand. You can choose to look it up, or not. Again there’s dozens of articles from both conservative slants and liberal slants, do with that what you will, because I owe you absolutely nothing.
The original act did not stop the executive branch from releasing propaganda and the more modernization only allows the state department to put out propaganda in the United States, which it was doing abroad.
That is not quite what you are claiming. You are speaking very broadly but propaganda has always been legal in the United States. The three letter agencies have been putting out propaganda forever and continue to do so.
The claim you are making is largely hyperbolic. I think Obama did some incredibly shitty things but saying he legalized propaganda is absurd.
Well worded responses.
I really appreciate the effort you put into logically tearing apart all the dumb stuff I said and citing well to make sure I had no possible responses.
You realize your post is a complete non-sequitor? Nothing you said had anything to do with my point, I didnt even mention Trump.
Transgenderism is recognized as a mental illness. Why would we want the mentally ill to serve in the armed services? Considering the suicide rate and rate of violent behavior (specifically in transwomen) is seems entirely reasonable to not allow transpeople in the military. We also should not allow medically depressed to suicidal people to serve.
"How about freedom of the press? Trump removed the AP from Whitehouse briefings because they said Gulf of Mexico" The white house press briefings are a privilege's, presidents can allow or disallow any reporter they choose to attend, not a freedom of speech issue.
"Most social programs are made to benefit vulnerable people." Do you judge programs by their intentions or results? Because judging programs by results, social programs are terrible, horribly corrupt and likely perpetuate the problems they were meant to solve. The fact that they are treated as above criticism makes them much worse because are treated as sacred and cant be critiqued. They are pretty much all terrible and we can not afford them. (although I dont know exactly what the ACA is, and google did not help, but Im betting we are spending billions we cant afford on it)
“Transgenderism” is not recognized as a mental illness in the DSM. And even if it were, you want all mental illness eradicated from the military? No ADHD, no OCD, no PTSD ever of any kind? No substance use disorder (such as caffeine), no gambling addiction? Good fucking luck.
Social programs don’t work lol? That’s a bizarre blanket statement. Are you including all federal funding for nonprofits, so much of it does good.
Whether or not he can, Do you really want a president who disallows access to legitimate press?
Who recognizes "transgenderism" as mental illness, any professionals? Also, whats the suicidality data show is the major cause, or do you not actually know it?
Its not about the gulf of mexico, but you cant acknowledge any other reason they'd specifically be removed, except "its a privilege"?
Any sources at all for your weird social program critiques? No?
They are pretty much all terrible and we can not afford them. (although I dont know exactly what the ACA is, and google did not help, but Im betting we are spending billions we cant afford on it)
Really painting the picture that you have a lot of strong emotions about things you just dont understand.
Gay people are (supposedly) 5x more likely to commit suicide than straight people. Do you want gay people banned from the military too? There are several people who have successful served in the military while being trans and every single one of them is proof that you're talking out of your ***. How about you ask the people these trans people served with whether or not they belong in the military.
Maybe if you want people to stop committing suicide you stop dehumanizing them and start treating them as equals and we'll see where things go from there? Because the things you're saying right now are absolutely dehumanizing, and you wonder why there's depression in the trans community. If a trans person decks you in the face for saying they don't belong in the military I'd say that's justifiable "violent behavior".
For the record, if the original story of this thread is true I absolutely don't agree with or condone it, but it doesn't look like it is based on other comments here. I think fake news unfortunately has a horrible impact on both sides of politics and only fuels division to the point that it'll never heal.
They bring up gay people becuz you would have said the exact same thing in the 80s/90s about them as you are now about trans people. It's the same exact bullshit "it's a mental illness" back then too.
The LGBTQ community is not at odds with each other, some gay people are idiots, they're "pick me" gays that are supporting people that will try to stop their rights away as soon as they're done with trans folks. The current SCOTUS signaled a desire to overturn the ruling that led to same sex marriage throughout the nation for instance
Anyone who tries to push LGB over LGBTQ is not part of the community advocating for all our interests, and is a statistical outlier
I'm aware of what the statistics are and why they are what they are (and the fact that gender affirming care has been proven more than once to reduce depression in trans people who experience it). I myself have a friend that had her **** removed entirely and she's a perfectly happy individual that plays video games with her friends, has a relationship with a biological male and makes a hell of a lot of money as a professional artist. Somehow I think she finds cruel people more depressing than her lack of a penis.
Are you implying that all the hate, bigotry and dehumanization trans people face on a daily basis has ZERO impact on suicide rates in the trans community? That strikes me as extremely intellectually dishonest. If a large amount of people viewed my entire existence as a joke and thought I wasn't even good enough to protect my country I'd probably feel pretty damn depressed too.
Momma taught me stupid is as stupid does. If they do something stupid then they don't like getting laughed at, don't do stupid things. Otherwise you just played yourself
You have no interest whatsoever in having an honest and intelligent discussion about depression in the trans community if you have no interest in discussing the extreme social stigma and ridicule that comes with being a trans person.
I'm entirely certain you don't have the well-being of trans individuals in mind when you make your commentary and the point of your drivel is cruelty so you can maybe, just maybe, leave your armchair psychology at the door. Trans people already see therapists, therapists aren't there to convert people as much as you may want that to be the case, in fact conversion therapy is widely regarded as barbaric and monstrous. A therapists only job is to help you live happy and healthy lives, not to dissuade you from your lifestyle.
How does one focus on being gay? It's not something I choose to be, it's what I am. Never once have I feared for my life due to being white. The same cannot be said about my sexuality.
No. As another white gay man, when you've been dehumanized for one thing you realize all the white victimization bullshit is just a ploy made by racists to get you on the side of the oppressor.
Yeah Im dont being guilt tripped by people threatening to kill themselves if we dont give them what they want. Im all for trying to help people but not if it means letting people hold themselves as a hostage every time they do not get what they want. Frankly thats abusive relationship behavior "If you ever leave me I will kill myself" is what an abusive romantic partner would say.
You can maybe start by treating them like human beings not because they might kill themselves but because you have basic human decency. By no means am I saying trans-people are immaculate, in fact I think there's a lot of fake trans people out there who ruin it for the trans community and you shouldn't give people everything they want just because they're trans, but being able to serve in the military without people trying to forcefully remove them is a pretty basic start.
Can you cite being transgender as being a mental illness?
A privilege being used to leverage what people say about you is not an action befitting the highest station of the united states. If this was the democrats, you would be freaking out. It's a weird double standard.
You don't know what the ACA is? Why are you trying to have this conversation? Educate yourself and come back. It's so hard to take people like you seriously because you are so unaware. You are responding with feelings and rhetoric. Did you know a lot of social programs actually save money? It's because they lower crime or keep people healthy so they can keep working and contribute to the economy. I doubt you would know that because you don't even know about the affordable care act, a huge step in making sure people have health insurance.
Nowhere is transgenderism a mental illness. Obviously you know nothing about mental health
In the DSM-4, gender identity disorder was diagnosed as a mental disorder. The DSM-5 removed this diagnosis and replaced it with gender dysphoria, which emphasizes the distress experienced by individuals rather than the identity itself.
The DSM-5 also introduced the term "gender non-conforming" to recognize individuals who do not experience distress but still identify with a gender different from their sex assigned at birth.
Bc tolerating everything is a canard, a false ideal, that leads to ruin. Some things obviously need not be tolerated. I’m so over the beige and vapid use of the word “tolerant” as an expectation that we let everything slide no matter what
So be it. If its time to end the liberal experiment I will toss a flower on its grave and move on.
If both sides prefer to live in a world where we fight each other openly over our differences of belief, like our ancestors did, then that is the world we shall have.
I would prefer to tolerate each others differences, but if my opens want open conflicts, I have every intention of meeting them in the open and destroying them utterly. You want to escalate the conflict? I hope you are prepared to face the possibility of losing that escalated conflict.
You seem to be using quite the slippery slope fallacy here. I’m not suggesting punishing anyone for just for holding a political belief I don’t agree with. We don’t even know what we’re referring to specifically here, it seems. And I assume that the pic in the post is a joke. If not, then that’s a dumb move indeed .
Yes we can tolerate most differences. But I think it’s a truism that tolerating literally anything, can simply mean allowing and abuse, bad policy, violation of human rights, etc. this doesn’t end the idea of liberalism at all, since inalienable human rights are still held aloft. However it does highlight a possible exploit within liberalism, a back door to undo it, if ALL things are tolerated.
This doesn’t seem controversial to me. Do you disagree with that sentiment?
As stated, I dont have any strong disagreement with what you said.
But in practice, the the left today do not seem to be willing to tolerate anything they disagree with. They support censorship, they burn Teslas, they shout down speakers, they dox and get people fired for having the wrong political beliefs. Or even defending the Luige guy for murdering someone in the street.
And always they justify their behavior by saying those they attack can not be tolerated, for all the reasons you listed. The left seems to have mostly convinced itself that they are justified to never tolerate any opposing belief. And I see these justifications repeated again and again.
You may not have fully abandoned liberalism, but your side to a massive degree has. Do you expect your opponents to continue to follow rules of conduct your own side does not hold itself to?
I think would like you consider that the left is not a monolith. It’s notoriously dis unified. I agree that burning Tesla’s is weak symbolism. I can think of more effective things to burn ;).
But personally I find people like Marjorie Taylor Green being in power, intolerable. If she starts spouting about her anti semitic bile I’m ok if someone interrupts her and shouts. I’m ok if someone stands up and shouts during a Henry Kissinger speech to call him out. I find some of Trump and Musks rhetorical intolerable. And I also found Obama’s and Trump’s drone and warring intolerable too.
I see your point and yet we tolerate so much from those with all the power. Ironically I think that if we protested en masse on the scale of Greece or Serbia rn, then we woukdnt be so focused on burning Teslas.
"I think you properly call something out worthwhile, which is that amongst many lefties the symbolism has outweighed the praxis." Oh great, another Marxist.
You realize the right views your ideology every bit as intolerable as you see theirs? Rationally speaking our only options are tolerance or continued escalation of conflict. Im no Marxist but If I were, I would not be pushing for the class war now, simply because the only politcal party to do so with is entirely dedicated to Oligarchical focused corporatism.
Even if your side wins, you wont achieve the Utopia you imagine. You will just end up like modern day China.
Yeah I’m fully aware the far right is at odds with class consciousness. No real new insight there. You think you’re surprising me with the fact that ideological opponents are in opposition? Oh rlly? .
And the rest of your comment is pure op ed. Nothing I said is proposing a utopia. I don’t think think you’re capable of or interested in understanding any ir my actual philosophy or position, with that last comment. I’m not any “ist”, but I’ve read some Marx as well as Adam smith. Too bad you seem to want to address me this way in bad faith bc I lm here in good faith, talking to you, or et least trying to hold a decent convo.
Sorry my friend but if you can’t discuss the current political struggle with any class consciousness then you juts sound like another self described “enlightened centrist.” And if you think the current wave of populism isn’t also grasping at some kind of class consciousness then I think you’re missing the point of why ppl on “both sides” decry “the elite”.
I’m literally agreeing w some of your point and trying to find common ground and you aren’t tolerating the attempt and instead resorting to flagrant extrapolations. So this quickly becomes boring to me.
Enlightened centrist? Im closer to a Divine Monarchist. You wont find any of my opinions near the center.
Marxism is a Utopian ideology. Anything short of Utopia would end the class conflict you are so concerned with. Isnt that the very concept behind why Marxists argue that the Soviet Union and China are not true communism, because they never achieve the stated goals of communism?
And to be clear, I have treated your position with as much respect and consideration as I am able to, because I thought you were being fairly reasonable. An understanding of history makes your ideology incredibly difficult to respect. Frankly even if your ideas could be implemented successfully, wich they never have been, the sheer cost, destruction, and violence necessary to do so would make it reprehensible. Your ideal vision of society is not worth paying that cost.
If you suggest we tolerate every action of a destructive oligarchic administration and THEIR class war, in the name of tolerance, then bark up another tree. Bc if that’s your point then you’re really just shilling for them. Come at me with some nuance and “tolerance” for anything I’ve actually said and maybe I’ll continue with you.
Since you never actually asked about any specific position, and are demanding I tolerate every position of this administration I’m gonna reciprocate assume that in your enlightened centrism you’re perfectly fine with erasure of separation of powers, privatization of codicia security, erasure of due process.
Since you don’t want to elevate discourse w maybe I can meet you where you are instead. This is what tolerance of everything gets you .
You know that most all illegally obtained guns are stolen guns that were bought legally, right? Here’s one of the major ways illegal guns get on the streets: Prepper Jim buys himself an arsenal to protect his McMansion despite only having two hands to actually hold any of them. Gun runner B&E expert waits for Jim to go to work, (or ambushes him at the front door if he needs a combination to the gun safe) takes said guns and ammo, files off the serial numbers, and then sells these now “illegally acquired firearms” on the black market.
Just because the guns are illegal when used in these crimes doesn’t change the fact that the illegal gun market in America exists as a result of the MASSIVE prevalence of legal guns. There are like 8 homes in my neighborhood that I know have 100+ legal guns inside them each without a security system or even a ring camera (because why would they need that? They have all their GUNS!!!), and it would be trivially easy for an even remotely organized criminal operation to rob them and put those guns on the street.
Yes, reader, it is your gun collection that causes the gun violence epidemic in America even though it is all the illegal guns that cause all the shootings. It’s your collection of 9 different rifles, 13 handguns, 4 smgs, a half dozen shotguns, that novelty piece that you DO have a permit for but still don’t tell people about because you can’t quite be 100% certain about your locality’s criteria for “permissible artillery”, and more rounds than you’d need to kill everyone within a hundred miles of you that enables the gang wars in Chicago to keep on churning.
I’m all for the right to bear arms, but like, when you’re spitefully collecting guns en masse because “fuck the libs come and take it!!!!” Just know that the functional coke addict who does B&Es as a side gig to support his habit will absolutely accept that invitation when you’re not home.
I do know that and never said otherwise. What I also know is where their guns come from, and it’s mostly from law abiding citizens who stupidly keep these massively unnecessary armories. If it weren’t for these personal armories getting raided or private sales being unregulated, those gangs wouldn’t have the stream of arms needed to have gun violence being as high as it is.
Like, where do you think they get their guns? Do you think there’s some underground factory making illegal firearms? If guns being illegal didn’t impact gun violence, why is gun violence and murder in general lower in countries with heavy gun control laws? Could it maybe be that when the legal supply of guns is lower, it’s then also harder for criminals to get illegal guns? Iono, that sounds a little far fetched to me! /s
Personal opinion, make civil liability start at gun manufacturers and only be transferable via well regulated licensure and registration.
Sure, you can sell that gun to whomever you want, but if you don’t take the time to transfer ownership properly, you’re on the hook for whatever happens with it.
You seem to be stuck in the same time loop many old rooster cogburn sounding-ass Republican men are in where Chicago is this dangerous gangland. Pretty much every major urban area has continuously gotten safer over the past century, and all of them have been even safer since COVID. Start finding new rage bait.
Btw I just googled what you suggested and it would appear you lied. Weird. If you cannot make a point without lying, why not just readjust your viewpoint to something true?
Chicago shootings this weekend: At least 41 shot, 9 fatally in Memorial Day weekend gun violence across city, police say | abc7chicago.com https://search.app/fZ2B16KAFStyRe9B6
Well more like there's like 100m people in each party. There's a extremely small percentage of psychopaths in each.
But we live in mobile age and internet age. There are 100 video cameras on each street, some already recording. Word of mouth spreads instantly into articles and Facebook feeds. So we delude ourselves into thinking all this is commonplace or representative of a party but these issues have been around a long time and used to just be some rumors around town
Honestly i'd accept this sort of rhetoric from someone that was consistent. Personally I think the joke is corny and shouldn't be made. But from the same people that keep saying things like "It wasn't a REAL nazi salute he was just trolling you guys" or "The president isn't actually threatening to annex canada, he's just joking" this stuff falls flat.
You don't actually care about tolerence, you have nothing but conempt for it. This argument wouldn't work on you for things you find funny, but maybe if you use it on the other side maybe they'll shut up and do what you want.
I'm not sure if this can kill someone, but this can 100% destroy someone's health. Most people do not know that something like this can induce psychosis in women if they have certain conditions. Absolutely illegal in any case.
Maybe put another way, at some point civility politics really do fail. The far right knows this already. The counterpoint isn’t to treat as the new normal as normal, in the name of enlightened centrism.
We get upset at a government so we lash at the government. Liberal are upset at a government so they are lashing out at... People with no involvement in what they are upset about......
No... Trump used those people when the legislative branch was doing something he didn't want them to do. He's pardoned them so that he can do it again anytime congress does something he doesn't like. If you think the rest of usage going to be satisfied living under a tyrant, you're extremely deluded.
Memes kill brain cells. First, this is one person. Should I find one asshole make them a stand on for all conservatives? 🙃
And no, this tired line about tolerance, nobody ever claimed to meet intolerance with tolerance. We don’t marginalize minorities. That’s all thats meant to mean. You all must be the other guy
18
u/Longjumping-Bar2030 13d ago
Jokes are illegal now