Charlottesville

I'm going for curry with some students on Sunday and Chris Cantwell can just feck off.
You're not invited. Permanently.

Anyway. Can someone post stuff that is going on in Charlottesville instead of all this bickering.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Wind your neck in.

Ok Cupid are monetising the news. All companies do it all the damn time.

He either exists as a member on the site and nobody knows, or they do what they did.

Be angry at the company for seeking to make money from the issue. Do not take it to the realm of free speech and censorship because that's not what this is. To believe that it is would mark you out as being supremely naive.
Click to expand...
That's even worse. I don't give a flying feck about their reasons, whether they'd be virtue signalling or not, what matters is whether they are discriminating against him or not. And what happened to the guy that got banned from OK Cupid is actually discrimination, not censorship which is just as bad. I mean, Eboue pretty much proved my point by wanting to ban me for expressing a different view, what more is there to talk about?

Let's just drop this, at the end of the day this site is extremely, extremely liberal. People wanted to cut my head off not long ago for saying multiculturalism was bad in response to the previous terrorist attack (Manchester, I think). There's really no point in continuing - let's just agree to disagree.
 
Dumat12 said:
That's even worse. I don't give a flying feck about their reasons, whether they'd be virtue signalling or not, what matters is whether they are discriminating against him or not. And what happened to the guy that got banned from OK Cupid is actually discrimination, not censorship which is just as bad. I mean, Eboue pretty much proved my point by wanting to ban me for expressing a different view, what more is there to talk about?

Let's just drop this, at the end of the day this site is extremely, extremely liberal. People wanted to cut my head off not long ago for saying multiculturalism was bad in response to the previous terrorist attack (Manchester, I think). There's really no point in continuing - let's just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

You're comparing things as though they are the same. It's not discrimination. It's profiteering.

It's not about left and right. It's being cnuty.

All sponsors dropping Lance Armstrong after the Oprah interview is in the same ballpark. EVERYONE knew that guy cheated. Once it became financially harmful to be associated with him, people fled.

This is how the world works. The capitalist environment holds this as the closest thing to their heart. Cash is king. Constant growth is essential to keep the flywheel spinning. That's far more a right leaning construct than a left. People turn into assholes and profit by working angles. It sucks.

But to put things like this into the "Liberals and free speech" basket is ridiculous. You probably know it. Look from another angle. You know this is not discrimination. It's not free speech. It's 'Can we use this to make more money'. It's how it ALWAYS is. There's no need to twist it to fit a narrative.

Protest it for what it is, but don't take it elsewhere.
 
Just got a text from a friend in the city where I work saying there are over 100 cars and coaches full of right-wingers there. They drive around all day playing loud music and making speeches. Haven't a clue what they are saying though, so feck them.
 
Dumat12 said:
That's even worse. I don't give a flying feck about their reasons, whether they'd be virtue signalling or not, what matters is whether they are discriminating against him or not. And what happened to the guy that got banned from OK Cupid is actually discrimination, not censorship which is just as bad. I mean, Eboue pretty much proved my point by wanting to ban me for expressing a different view, what more is there to talk about?

Let's just drop this, at the end of the day this site is extremely, extremely liberal. People wanted to cut my head off not long ago for saying multiculturalism was bad in response to the previous terrorist attack (Manchester, I think). There's really no point in continuing - let's just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

A private company can get rid of whoever they want, for whatever reason they want. They aren't bound by the constitution to keep his account on their servers.
Stop trying to say it's censorship, you've spent your entire time in this thread trying to cape for the rights of nazis, how sad.

Also, you can blame liberalism on this site all you want, but imagine thinking thinking multiculturalism was bad - does seeing black and brown people offend you?
In fact I don't even want to know.
 
The fact people are still defending these Nazi cnuts after they commited a terror attack on an innocent women? Self defence right?
And defending the Daily Stormer.. same site that called the innocent women a fat ugly slut. Fecking hell.

These 'people' if you can call them that, deserve no rights. Didn't realise being an advocate for mass genocide was so highly regarded?
All this movement stands for is hatred, division & violence. That's it, that's all it'll ever be. In an ideal world it would have no place what so ever. These wankers, deserve everything that's coming to them.
Ignore the past, guranteed to repeat it.

Perhaps instead of defending those that only stand for hate & division on such petty issues as a dating website & a hate website.. defend those that actually suffer genuine oppression. Something tells me this is unlikely.
 


Whilst I'd love to do this, the big worry here is that a sizeable amount of the Nazi's in the Charlottesville march were armed to the teeth with assault rifles, handguns and hunting knives. I don't think throwing eggs, water balloons and jokes would do much when the return fire is bullets.
 
Perhaps in Germany it works because right wing extremists don't actually have the right to say whatever they want, are closely watched by authorities and have zero political power?

Liberals really do live in a bubble, blissfully unaware of the world around them. Thing is, they personally don't feel threatened by right wingers, so they don't really mind them that much, as long as illusions of status quo and 'free speech' are intact.
 
langster said:


Whilst I'd love to do this, the big worry here is that a sizeable amount of the Nazi's in the Charlottesville march were armed to the teeth with assault rifles, handguns and hunting knives. I don't think throwing eggs, water balloons and jokes would do much when the return fire is bullets.
Click to expand...


Not sure about that. They ended up being confronted in a far more aggressive way than that and still nobody got shot.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Not sure about that. They ended up being confronted in a far more aggressive way than that and still nobody got shot.
Click to expand...

Nope, but surely you must think that's more by luck than judgement? It only needs one to lose his shit or for one to fire a warning shot and things could turn very nastily and dangerous very quickly. That many guns in highly tense and volatile situations coupled with irresponsible, angry and stupid people. The possibility of drugs and alcohol being involved too and two sides of people who are as politically and morally far apart as possible. With a situation being made worse on a daily basis and blanket coverage in the press and one side feeling emboldened by messages from their President. I just hope any future protests and counter protests pass without incident and that the Police can get a firm grip on it all and they receive the support and backing they need to do so.
 
I've been thinking about this statue thing.

The debate about them happening now is the conversation America should have had in 1865.

Instead, in areas of the south, you have had 150 years of confederates essentially living as if they won. Yes, they couldn't have slaves, but the ex slaves were controlled in other ways once freed, essentially keeping them tied to the land. And to this day are considered by those who think of themselves as the 'true south' as second class people.

In essence, they are still fighting the civil war, its the same argument.
 
langster said:
Nope, but surely you must think that's more by luck than judgement? It only needs one to lose his shit or for one to fire a warning shot and things could turn very nastily and dangerous very quickly. That many guns in highly tense and volatile situations coupled with irresponsible, angry and stupid people. The possibility of drugs and alcohol being involved too and two sides of people who are as politically and morally far apart as possible. With a situation being made worse on a daily basis and blanket coverage in the press and one side feeling emboldened by messages from their President. I just hope any future protests and counter protests pass without incident and that the Police can get a firm grip on it all and they receive the support and backing they need to do so.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that I just disagree with the idea that taking the piss out of them and reacting with humour instead of hostility would have made the situation more volatile.

Having said that, I understand why feelings would have been running high and it's easy to sit here telling people how they should react when it's not my great-grandparents who were enslaved and raped by the same type of people that carried those Tiki torches.
 
Dumat12 said:
That's even worse. I don't give a flying feck about their reasons, whether they'd be virtue signalling or not, what matters is whether they are discriminating against him or not. And what happened to the guy that got banned from OK Cupid is actually discrimination, not censorship which is just as bad. I mean, Eboue pretty much proved my point by wanting to ban me for expressing a different view, what more is there to talk about?

Let's just drop this, at the end of the day this site is extremely, extremely liberal. People wanted to cut my head off not long ago for saying multiculturalism was bad in response to the previous terrorist attack (Manchester, I think). There's really no point in continuing - let's just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

i love how people complain about virtue signaling for whenever someone isnt a piece of shit. a private company is under no obligation to help nazis get laid. motherfecking nazis should be discriminated against. what more is there to talk about?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I don't disagree with that I just disagree with the idea that taking the piss out of them and reacting with humour instead of hostility would have made the situation more volatile.

Having said that, I understand why feelings would have been running high and it's easy to sit here telling people how they should react when it's not my great-grandparents who were enslaved and raped by the same type of people that carried those Tiki torches.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough, and a valid point. Don't get me wrong, I would love to be there taking the piss out of them, I think they are a joke and to ridicule them would be hilarious, but you know how spiteful their lord and master is? If any one of them reacted in any way like Trump would then it would be a disaster. Insecurity runs high in racists and bigots, why else would they need to carry 4 or 5 guns at a time?

Actually, that's a question in itself. Does open carry allow you to walk around armed like Rambo? Insane if so.
 
Dumat12 said:
That's even worse. I don't give a flying feck about their reasons, whether they'd be virtue signalling or not, what matters is whether they are discriminating against him or not. And what happened to the guy that got banned from OK Cupid is actually discrimination, not censorship which is just as bad. I mean, Eboue pretty much proved my point by wanting to ban me for expressing a different view, what more is there to talk about?

Let's just drop this, at the end of the day this site is extremely, extremely liberal. People wanted to cut my head off not long ago for saying multiculturalism was bad in response to the previous terrorist attack (Manchester, I think). There's really no point in continuing - let's just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

There are valid debates to be had about the impacts of mass immigration of society and how that maybe could or should be controlled better. However, one thing is being from the right or from the left, another thing is coming out in support of Nazis and racists. It doesn't matter whether you are liberal or conservative in that case, Nazism cannot be tolerated in any form, in the same way Jihadism cannot be tolerated. This is not censorship, this is just being a normal person and recognising what is right or wrong whether you are liberal or conservative.
 
@Dumat12

I agree with you that you shouldn't be censored for holding an opinion, even if it is Naziism. I do however disagree that OK Cupid have some responsibility to this guy and to boot him off is censorship. At the end of the day a private company can do what it likes, and he doesn't have a right to their service.

Besides, companies aren't really expected to remain impartial. Look at newspapers - they all have political leanings. It just so happens that OK Cupid have an anti-Nazi one.
 
If nothing else, OK Cupid have a duty of care to their other customers. Someone who publically espouses vicious, prejudiced and violent ideas isn't really the type of person they should be setting up on dates, is it?
 
vi1lain said:
A private company can get rid of whoever they want, for whatever reason they want. They aren't bound by the constitution to keep his account on their servers.
Stop trying to say it's censorship, you've spent your entire time in this thread trying to cape for the rights of nazis, how sad.

Also, you can blame liberalism on this site all you want, but imagine thinking thinking multiculturalism was bad - does seeing black and brown people offend you?
In fact I don't even want to know.
Click to expand...

And the examples of monoculturalism are not only scarce but also far from historically peaceful.
 
JPRouve said:
And the examples of monoculturalism are not only scarce but also far from historically peaceful.
Click to expand...

Even without that - you can't just say something like 'multiculturalism is bad' without looking at the context that allowed for multiculturalism to happen in the first place.
Most multicultural countries have a history of genocide/slavery/colonialism, and the people who make it multicultural - more often than not - come from the very countries that were historically affected in the first place.

Aside from the implied racism, it's just such an ignorant statement to make.
 
vi1lain said:
A private company can get rid of whoever they want, for whatever reason they want. They aren't bound by the constitution to keep his account on their servers.
Stop trying to say it's censorship, you've spent your entire time in this thread trying to cape for the rights of nazis, how sad.

Also, you can blame liberalism on this site all you want, but imagine thinking thinking multiculturalism was bad - does seeing black and brown people offend you?
In fact I don't even want to know.
Click to expand...

You can be against multiculturalism without being racist. If you genuinely believe that different cultures don't mix, as has been seen with the more radical side of Islam and the west, then that's your opinion. All the black people I know are English, and abide by English laws and culture. In fact all the Muslims I know do as well, but it's the clashing ideologies I believe was more his point, not their skin colour.
 
2 Man Midfield said:
You can be against multiculturalism without being racist. If you genuinely believe that different cultures don't mix, as has been seen with the more radical side of Islam and the west, then that's your opinion. All the black people I know are English, and abide by English laws and culture. In fact all the Muslims I know do as well, but it's the clashing ideologies I believe was more his point, not their skin colour.
Click to expand...

Modern english culture is multicultural though.
 
It would help this discussion if people could define what they mean by multiculturalism.
 
2 Man Midfield said:
You can be against multiculturalism without being racist. If you genuinely believe that different cultures don't mix, as has been seen with the more radical side of Islam and the west, then that's your opinion. All the black people I know are English, and abide by English laws and culture. In fact all the Muslims I know do as well, but it's the clashing ideologies I believe was more his point, not their skin colour.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call radical Islam a 'culture' more so a political ideology, therefore I disagree with your comparison there. I think it's pretty impossible to co-exist with subset of people who's ideology involves actively killing people who's beliefs are different to theirs - that's not the same as co-existing with Greeks, Italians & Jamaicans as an example.

Culture to me is defined as ideas, customs & social behaviours of a particular subset of people, and multiculturalism is the co-existence of multiple cultures.
Interesting you said all the black people you know are English - all the black people you know are still part of the black culture, but have assimilated to English society as a way to live, that doesn't mean they are no longer part of the black diaspora.

If he said radical islam can't co-incide with British culture, i'd agree. But saying multiculturalism is bad, yes that includes skin colour.
 
All organised religion is politics at heart.
 
Dumat12 said:
This is pathetic, tbh. Censoring him just for his political views? The guy may be an asshole but as long as he follows the rules of the site, why is it a problem?
Click to expand...
Racism isn't a political view.
 
Thought this was interesting.

https://www.statnews.com/2017/08/16/white-nationalists-genetic-ancestry-test/

I'm probably wrong but I feel like some kind of public database of genetic ancestry, with a law making it compulsory for everyone to take, would go some way to tackling the problem of white nationalism by disputing the very origins of it.

Though inevitably a significant minority would put it down to a Jew conspiracy. There were obviously mixed results in the link above but I feel like adding a layer of public visibility to it could act as a useful deterrent.
 
JPRouve said:
Modern english culture is multicultural though.
Click to expand...

It depends on your definition. I don't know whether the OP was for the preservation of traditional English culture ala John Major, or whatever. Modern England is comprised of many different cultures, generations deep and as English as anyone, so I agree it wouldn't really work if you're talking about anything modern.

vi1lain said:
I wouldn't call radical Islam a 'culture' more so a political ideology, therefore I disagree with your comparison there. I think it's pretty impossible to co-exist with subset of people who's ideology involves actively killing people who's beliefs are different to theirs - that's not the same as co-existing with Greeks, Italians & Jamaicans as an example.

Culture to me is defined as ideas, customs & social behaviours of a particular subset of people, and multiculturalism is the co-existence of multiple cultures.
Interesting you said all the black people you know are English - all the black people you know are still part of the black culture, but have assimilated to English society as a way to live, that doesn't mean they are no longer part of the black diaspora.

If he said radical islam can't co-incide with British culture, i'd agree. But saying multiculturalism is bad, yes that includes skin colour.
Click to expand...

Again, it's such a broad definition. Maybe Islam was a bad choice seeing as it's not a race, but it was just the first example I thought of when people usually point to the incompatibility of foreign cultures in England, it's probably the most publicised example anyway.

I'm not sure skin colour could come under culture, mind. As I mentioned above there are English black and Asian people generations deep just as English as the next man who engage in traditionally British culture, So I think we'll have to agree to disagree that anyone saying multiculturalism is bad is automatically against anyone of colour. They might well be against American culture, for whatever reason. It's a patriotic, xenophobic view for sure but I'd be hesitant to call it racist. You're not saying these other cultures are necessarily detrimental, or backward or anything like that. Just that they don't mix, which is a fair enough opinion.
 
2 Man Midfield said:
It depends on your definition. I don't know whether the OP was for the preservation of traditional English culture ala John Major, or whatever. Modern England is comprised of many different cultures, generations deep and as English as anyone, so I agree it wouldn't really work if you're talking about anything modern.
Click to expand...

Which tells you that it doesn't work, you can't say that multiculturalism is bad and then exclude the very society you are living in, which I suppose is also used as an example of "good" culture for the people with this type of views. The reality is that some individuals aren't compatible with societal lives, just look at ISIS they have created havoc in the Middle East within the culture that some consider like the problem.
 
2 Man Midfield said:
Again, it's such a broad definition. Maybe Islam was a bad choice seeing as it's not a race, but it was just the first example I thought of when people usually point to the incompatibility of foreign cultures in England, it's probably the most publicised example anyway.

I'm not sure skin colour could come under culture, mind. As I mentioned above there are English black and Asian people generations deep just as English as the next man who engage in traditionally British culture, So I think we'll have to agree to disagree that anyone saying multiculturalism is bad is automatically against anyone of colour. They might well be against American culture, for whatever reason. It's a patriotic, xenophobic view for sure but I'd be hesitant to call it racist. You're not saying these other cultures are necessarily detrimental, or backward or anything like that. Just that they don't mix, which is a fair enough opinion.
Click to expand...

Of course it does - you can't exclude skin colour from the conversation because a lot of cultures are derived from homogeneous society's, especially Black and Asian cultures.

You're using examples of Black & Asian English people - I don't know any black or asian people who are implicitly English and deny traditions & customs associated to being part of the Black/Asian culture - such as food, cultural traditions, practices etc.
I would fit into your theory of presenting as English in public, however when i'm at home, and with my family I'm fully engaged as part of my Ghanaian & Black culture, when i'm with my friends i'm fully engaged with black british culture, in fact this is something that most people of colour naturally do - a cultural code switching if you will.

It's not that because someone is English and they are also Black or Asian that they only belong to the English culture - that couldn't be further from the truth at all - what they are doing is assimilating into multiple cultures as part of multiculturalism.
Race can't be excluded from the conversation at all.
 
Dumat12 said:
You have any idea how many fecked up shit is there on the internet and how many fecked up people are using it? By your logic we should ban half the internet users because they are not politically correct. Get real, one thing I agree with these extremist right groups is the right to free speech - anyone should have it, doesn't matter if they are communists, nazis, whatever. Free speech is free speech, it shouldn't be infringed no matter what.
Click to expand...

I think you're making an mistake here and are seeing things completely back to front. Right wing extremist organisations have no interest in defending the right to free speech - their entire ethos suggests that once empowered they would seek to prevent it. In reality they only have an interest in having the right to speak themselves. Nazis are in no way defenders of free speech, in this instance free speech is the defender of Nazis and you shouldn't allow yourself to be fooled by a transparently self serving posture.

I agree with you that what happened to the Dailystormer and Peter Feckwit (I can't remember his name nor care what it is) amounts to private censure and as such their ability to freely speak on private platforms is curtailed. The truth is that neither you or I or anyone else has an inalienable right of access to such platforms to start with. Tolerance of anything not protected by law is entirely voluntary on private platforms. Free speech on private grounds is not protected by law.
 
Last edited:
Ekkie Thump said:
I think you're making an mistake here and are seeing things completely back to front. Right wing extremist organisations have no interest in defending the right to free speech - their entire ethos suggests that once empowered they would seek to prevent it. In reality they only have an interest in having the right to speak themselves. Nazi's are in no way defenders of free speech, in this instance free speech is the defender of Nazis and you shouldn't allow yourself to be fooled by a transparently self serving posture.

I agree with you that what happened to the Dailystormer and Peter Feckwit (I can't remember his name nor care what it is) amounts to private censure and as such their ability to freely speak on private platforms is curtailed. The truth is that neither you or I or anyone else has an inalienable right of access to such platforms to start with. Tolerance of anything not protected by law is entirely voluntary on private platforms. Free speech on private grounds is not protected by law.
Click to expand...

In cartoon form:
tolerance.png
 
Adisa said:
Racism isn't a political view.
Click to expand...

Eboue said:
i love how people complain about virtue signaling for whenever someone isnt a piece of shit. a private company is under no obligation to help nazis get laid. motherfecking nazis should be discriminated against. what more is there to talk about?
Click to expand...

All that needs to be said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.