Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
That president
You do need at least an iota of authority to hold such a position, he seemed like a complete pushover. What we are saying now is the ultra right wing backlash against the hysteria (partly drummed up, partly real) generated by media over the PC regime imposed by leftists on college campuses. What, IMO, started out as a genuine concern over liberals' lack of tolerance of diverse opinions on some campuses will now always be hi-jacked by alt-right crowd to wage a battle against 'snowflakes'. And in the process, both sides will retreat into their trenches even more. Moreover, the original issue ,which called for a much more nuanced debate, will be lost in the noise.
These students need some real world perspective. One professor speaking out against their planned event is not the end of the world or even going to matter. The person I identified the most in that video was the female student who was too afraid to even reveal her last name and said that she is terrified of expressing her opinion freely if it disagreed with the prevailing one on campus. The folks who created such an atmosphere, want to call themselves liberals or progressive. Laughable.
@berbatrick would probably come in now and point towards the nauseating reaction of alt-right crowd to this. Of course the threat and actions of right wing authoritarian crowd is much much worse but that can't insulate the students from any critique of their intolerance.
Cops in Canada doing a good job, again
Dud Lindy just presume my limbs?
Making a visit to Gettysburg, PA this summer to visit the battlefield. There had been much made in the last few years about things like the Confederate flag and monuments to people who served in the Confederate Army and Government.
On the battlefield are many monuments to the various units from both sides of the battle. What's everyone's view on this? Is it wrong to have monuments to the Confederate soldiers who fought there? Is context everything, IE as long as the battle is presented in it's historical context, the monuments are ok?
In some places there are just historical markers to indicate the position of a unit others are in fact meant to honor the troops.
General Longstreet
.jpg)
The Virginia Monument
This I believe is the Louisiana Monument
This is an example of one that is more about the facts of the battle and a units participation
On the battlefield are many monuments to the various units from both sides of the battle. What's everyone's view on this? Is it wrong to have monuments to the Confederate soldiers who fought there? Is context everything, IE as long as the battle is presented in it's historical context, the monuments are ok?
In some places there are just historical markers to indicate the position of a unit others are in fact meant to honor the troops.
General Longstreet
The Virginia Monument
This I believe is the Louisiana Monument
This is an example of one that is more about the facts of the battle and a units participation
Memorials to the dead in general are fine, but I guess if say Germany put up a Mengele statue, it would cause a lot of shite. Glorying individuals on the losing side seems a bit taboo, rightly or wrongly. I guess it all comes down to 'blame' as much as anything.Making a visit to Gettysburg, PA this summer to visit the battlefield. There had been much made in the last few years about things like the Confederate flag and monuments to people who served in the Confederate Army and Government.
On the battlefield are many monuments to the various units from both sides of the battle. What's everyone's view on this? Is it wrong to have monuments to the Confederate soldiers who fought there? Is context everything, IE as long as the battle is presented in it's historical context, the monuments are ok?
In some places there are just historical markers to indicate the position of a unit others are in fact meant to honor the troops.
General Longstreet
The Virginia Monument
This I believe is the Louisiana Monument
This is an example of one that is more about the facts of the battle and a units participation
Or maybe to the losing side being a bunch of slavery supporting assholes?
Making a visit to Gettysburg, PA this summer to visit the battlefield. There had been much made in the last few years about things like the Confederate flag and monuments to people who served in the Confederate Army and Government.
On the battlefield are many monuments to the various units from both sides of the battle. What's everyone's view on this? Is it wrong to have monuments to the Confederate soldiers who fought there? Is context everything, IE as long as the battle is presented in it's historical context, the monuments are ok?
In some places there are just historical markers to indicate the position of a unit others are in fact meant to honor the troops.
General Longstreet
The Virginia Monument
This I believe is the Louisiana Monument
This is an example of one that is more about the facts of the battle and a units participation
depends on the individual and how it is presented. You can have memorials without forgetting the crimes/actions of the purpotraitors. The worId is not black and white. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson,MvB, Harrison J.Tyler, Polk and Z. Tyler all owned slaves (not sure about Johson, Grant, Buchanan, Pierce, Hayes and Arthur). Yet nobody reduces them to this part of their history. Many president of the early 20th century were racist dicks, yet nobody wants Woodrow Wilson statues removed.
Does it not just make sense that you're seeing a lot of monuments to the losing side then.
I guess them glorifying the losing side could be an issue.
People seem to have reduced that war to one over slavery, which, correct me if im wrong, was almost a side issue picked up mid way through a long war.
I'm not an expert on American History though so what do i know.
As for the Nazi thing. Auschwitz is a monument of sorts to them.
Depends which war you're talking about. Would it be that offensive if the Germans have a Red Baron statue? Can't see a massive issue with that- helps he was obviously pre-Nazi.
Tbf I think he is the only iron cross holder to be removed from the records.
A Mengele statue! That would cause a whole world of crap. Do you have the right Nazi?
I read his diaries the other year- everyone hated him- had a mutual loathing with Klaus Barbie.
This will be my 5th trip in my lifetime to Gettysburg. I was just wondering about how others saw the monuments especially in light of the change in recent years with things like other monuments being taken down, the confederate battle flag being taken down, etc.
I'll PM you with further discussion of the Civil War, don't want to detail this thread.
@JustAFan
I was in Chapel Hill this weekend and was quite shocked that at the centre of the (very liberal) campus, there's a statue to a confederate soldier, established by the daughters of the confederacy.
College snowflakes managed to get a tiny monument made a little distance away, which points out that the university was made by slaves. It's so small I thought it was a table+bench.
I was in Chapel Hill this weekend and was quite shocked that at the centre of the (very liberal) campus, there's a statue to a confederate soldier, established by the daughters of the confederacy.
College snowflakes managed to get a tiny monument made a little distance away, which points out that the university was made by slaves. It's so small I thought it was a table+bench.
I think it's fine. Its right to question the leaders and the reasons for the battle, but as long as there were no atrocities committed you should always honour soldiers who gave their lives to fight for their country.
By and large in WW2 our soldiers had respect for the regular German soldiers on the other side. The Japanese not so much.
I can't see a problem. It was a Civil War after all, Americans died on both sides.
I don't see that these monuments are glorifying anything, more a reminder of a terrible period in American history.
So I guess this belongs here. Bugger all to do with political correctness but will create frothing outrage amongst those who have an issue with it.
I am, of course, talking about the lawyer's decision to spell her name without capital letters. WTF?
I am, of course, talking about the lawyer's decision to spell her name without capital letters. WTF?
Oh god that lawyers website is not a rabbit hole I want to go down.
Probably end up in convulsions from the rampant insanity.
Probably end up in convulsions from the rampant insanity.
This is utterly and completely wrong. The entire tensions that led to the war were between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions (free states). It was an issue that had caused vicious assaults in congress, murders, riots and much more. Even in the articles of succession most of the confederate states explicitly stated they were leaving to protect their rights to keep slaves.
After the war when many in the south tried to rewrite that history (they called it the War of Northern Aggression) they painted over the slavery issue because they couldn't justify it and tried to imply the war was all about 'states rights'. It's bollocks, they were fighting for the right to keep human beings as property.
The 'local queer newspaper' is not oppressing her, it just prefers to stick to grammar. Companies periodically complain that we don't cap up their names, as they do, or job titles- it's called a paper's house style.
Even 'the breastless lesbian' seminar?
http://www.barbarafindlay.com/unlearning-oppression.html
I prefer wtf.
Thought this was very interesting.
What an uproar!
Can I suggest we edit the topic title to read "'has PC gawn mad?!!"
We could then also have this image setup to appear if you hover over the title...
We could then also have this image setup to appear if you hover over the title...
CNN threatening to dox the guy who made that video Trump re-tweeted. They really are a station of idiots.
Sometimes, yes political correctness has gone mad. Or at least social media is fecking ridiculous.
"Beauty queen wearing gloves at orphanage 'not racist'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-40496532
"Beauty queen wearing gloves at orphanage 'not racist'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-40496532
It's ridiculous,but the pics of people doing mundane tasks wearing gloves are quite funny tbf.
Hasn't got to much to do with political correctness but its the best place to put it
"What Should Socialists Say About Privilege?"
@berbatrick I think you might have posted similar stuff before.
"What Should Socialists Say About Privilege?"
@berbatrick I think you might have posted similar stuff before.
The DM Reporter @DMReporter 4m4 minutes ago
EXPOSED: ‘Nigger in the woodpile, chinky takeaway, paki shop, wogs’ - the charming British terms being destroyed by political correctness.
EXPOSED: ‘Nigger in the woodpile, chinky takeaway, paki shop, wogs’ - the charming British terms being destroyed by political correctness.
That'd probably outrage my nan.
I do shudder at what were common phrases in 1980s East Yorkshire.
out of yesterday’s two incidents
that politician hasn’t a leg to stand on. You can’t be having a phrase like that in your vocabulary.
But the Stormzy Lukkaku thing is a mountain out of a mole hill. They genuinely do look similar, it was lazy editor more than anything
that politician hasn’t a leg to stand on. You can’t be having a phrase like that in your vocabulary.
But the Stormzy Lukkaku thing is a mountain out of a mole hill. They genuinely do look similar, it was lazy editor more than anything
Not sure he's amused by it tbh.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/39917...wspaper-manchester-united-the-herald-twitter/
Not sure how these mistakes happen really- you buy a pic off AMP or whoever. You get feck ups when your photo library is a mess, eg mixing people with the same name up, like below, but it's pretty bad.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/ian-watkins-gets-high-court-2942978
Is it? At worst it's a bit ridiculous but for a simplisticity point of view makes sense just to say "Hello Everyone". Definitely not the moment when civilization as we know it has collapsed.
Shockingly enough, I like it.
It's absolutely harmless to the vast majority of the population and improves the lives of others.
Why the feck would you get upset by something like this?
Why the feck would you get upset by something like this?
I think i'd prefer a simple Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening, followed by the message. 'Hello everyone' sounds a bit weird.
It does make me think back to the evening of the London Bridge attacks though, in which a Met officer was heard addressing people as 'ladies and gentlemen'. She was merely trying to get some lagaards to move the hell along, no ill intent or anything.
It does make me think back to the evening of the London Bridge attacks though, in which a Met officer was heard addressing people as 'ladies and gentlemen'. She was merely trying to get some lagaards to move the hell along, no ill intent or anything.
Last edited:
Oh I see, ignoring Night...you got a problem with Night? We need to be more time-neutral.