So apparently JonTron is a racist

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
gigastar said:
Silvanus said:
How on earth do you know that? What's your level of familiarity with these courses?

All we have to go on is a highly charged, rhetorical account from a political opponent. We cannot simply assume his analysis is on the money and he must be right about them.
Suspend for review is what i said.
Suspend for review by whom?
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
Silvanus said:
Protesting is a behaviour that needs investigating, is it? Bollocks. If visitors can deliver speeches, then students can express their feelings towards people invited on-campus to deliver speeches. There's nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

I find it frankly absurd that you find it so objectionable that people might protest others' right to give speeches... that you want their protests investigated, and their curriculae censored if you find it politically objectionable. It really is the sheerest hypocrisy.

The sacredness of speech only extends to some, it seems, as usual.
And i find it absurd that you think allegations of coercion and indoctrination in education shouldnt be investigated.

And i dont treat education as speech. If education gets all the same protections as speech does then youll get classes turning out radical sectarians, facists and communists and there wont be a thing you can do about them.

And of course the sacredness of speech only extends to some, ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali about how she had to flee the Netherlands for fears of her own safety after daring to be critical of Islam. Or Milo having to abort his speech at UC Berkley, due to the riot waiting to get him.

Skatologist said:
In bold due to show that this phrase/argument/fallacy is still in wide use and still one of the most poisoning the well things you can do.

Jordans crime? Refusing to use gender neutral pronouns.

I dont care how you cut it, this is not rational human behaviour and ill be cold and dead before i admit otherwise.
 

Story

Note to self: Prooof reed posts
Sep 4, 2013
905
0
0
gigastar said:
Silvanus said:
Protesting is a behaviour that needs investigating, is it? Bollocks. If visitors can deliver speeches, then students can express their feelings towards people invited on-campus to deliver speeches. There's nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

I find it frankly absurd that you find it so objectionable that people might protest others' right to give speeches... that you want their protests investigated, and their curriculae censored if you find it politically objectionable. It really is the sheerest hypocrisy.

The sacredness of speech only extends to some, it seems, as usual.
And i find it absurd that you think allegations of coercion and indoctrination in education shouldnt be investigated.

And i dont treat education as speech. If education gets all the same protections as speech does then youll get classes turning out radical sectarians, facists and communists and there wont be a thing you can do about them.

And of course the sacredness of speech only extends to some, ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali about how she had to flee the Netherlands for fears of her own safety after daring to be critical of Islam. Or Milo having to abort his speech at UC Berkley, due to the riot waiting to get him.

Skatologist said:
In bold due to show that this phrase/argument/fallacy is still in wide use and still one of the most poisoning the well things you can do.

Jordans crime? Refusing to use gender neutral pronouns.

I dont care how you cut it, this is not rational human behaviour and ill be cold and dead before i admit otherwise.
I hate to interject again but I want to thank you for being up Jordan Peterson's case. That was an interesting read and it made me better understand why people do not like social justice causes; because it breaks away from the norm. While I see Peterson's position on the issue of transgendered pronouns (in that use of them seems authoritarian and controlling) refusing to say them on request of the host is pretty disrespectful. It's a shame that the host returned the same disrespect in turn. Defiantly disagree with the way the people handled that situation.

All that said what you posted didn't refute Skatologist's case (by that I mean the post he linked to). If anything it reaffirms it because by showing the video out of full context, you are suggesting that those protesters only interrupted him because they disagreed with his choice of pronouns but Appearently there is a lot more too it. Like the legal implications of it and the refusal to use them implies that he does not acknowledge that gender fluidity is valid. In general, it's trivializing the opponent...actually what Skatologist's warns about.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,029
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
gigastar said:
And i find it absurd that you think allegations of coercion and indoctrination in education shouldnt be investigated.
Allegations from students, or people with direct experience, should be investigated. Random politically-motivated online rants should not be investigated. A waste of time and brain cells.

gigastar said:
And i dont treat education as speech. If education gets all the same protections as speech does then youll get classes turning out radical sectarians, facists and communists and there wont be a thing you can do about them.
You're happy for educational courses to have so little protection that unsubstantiated rumours on the internet are enough to have them brought off the course listings?

That's not a recipe for protecting the little ones from indoctrination. That's a recipe for putting the power to decide what is taught into the hands of sensationalist idiots on the net. It would increase the politicisation of education a thousandfold.

gigastar said:
And of course the sacredness of speech only extends to some, ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali about how she had to flee the Netherlands for fears of her own safety after daring to be critical of Islam. Or Milo having to abort his speech at UC Berkley, due to the riot waiting to get him.
Am I supposed to be defending those who forced Ali and Yiannopolous to flee, or something? Is that why you're bringing that up?

I see no reason why those unrelated events justify the approach you've taken, to afford the right to speak to the visitors, but to deem any protest grounds for "investigation" and censorship.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
BeetleManiac said:
gigastar said:
Or Milo having to abort his speech at UC Berkley, due to the riot waiting to get him.
Dude, has it occurred to you that people are less likely to take you seriously when you act like defending a Nazi apologist is the most important civil rights challenge of your lifetime and getting shitty with people who don't see Nazis as a protected class?
So, you think riots, destruction of public property, and violence are legitimate forms of protest? Would that be a proper response to Anita Sarkesian giving a speech? Obama? Putin?

When you think that violent acts can be warranted by the person they are being perpetrated against, that is a problem. How can you not see that?
 

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Skatologist said:
> "Let's have an honest conversation about race."

> Literally says wealthy blacks commit more crimes than poor whites with absolutely no basis in actual fact.

You know, honest! /s
"Anytime someone brings up an uncomfortable statistic, you freak out, and burn things down." Jon, from the same video.

I can't tell if you didn't bother hearing his reply, or just tuned it out for something else, but you pretty much are demonstrating the entire message of his reply video to the letter right here.

As he states himself, the point made was that you can't keep harping on about everything being racial and then act surprised when everything is thought of in those terms. Ignoring that and ignoring that discrimination is universally wrong is simply divisive and intellectually dishonest. And yet that is so commonplace in the media itself, it is harmful to the very notion of tackling race issues.

You can't fight racism by enacting racism, and yet that seems to be the acceptable answer nowadays.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,459
2,746
118
runic knight said:
yet that seems to be the acceptable answer nowadays.
Is it or isn't it? Don't sit on the fence, you'll get a sore bottom.

Tentative answers are annoying and should only be used in academia, where no one hears what you say anyway. Say it firmly, with conviction!
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
BeetleManiac said:
gigastar said:
And i find it absurd that you think allegations of coercion and indoctrination in education shouldnt be investigated.
Allegations with no merit are just hot air. Your proof consists of a handful of logical fallacies, some lies, and a lot of emotional overreaction.
And what is now known as in the UK as Operation Trojan Horse wasnt anything more than allegations, until Ofsted investigated it [https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1579/investigation_report_trojan_horse_letter_the_kershaw_report].

Why argue against an investigation if youre so sure nothings wrong?

BeetleManiac said:
gigastar said:
Or Milo having to abort his speech at UC Berkley, due to the riot waiting to get him.
Dude, has it occurred to you that people are less likely to take you seriously when you act like defending a Nazi apologist is the most important civil rights challenge of your lifetime and getting shitty with people who don't see Nazis as a protected class?
Well i dont particularly like Milo either but since you like your asinine assertions i suppose ill have to defend him now.

Milo does not count himself among Richard Spencers enthno-facist alt-right. He championed the label before Richard showed up and turned it into the white supremacist movement we know today.

Even Milos detractors acknowledge hes not a white nationalist. [http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/02/03/24847763/retraction-milo-yiannopoulos-is-not-a-white-nationalist]

Milo is of Jewish descent and is a homosexual, either of which would have meant his death warrant under the Nazis. Not even fucking Antifa label him a Nazi. [https://antifascistnews.net/2016/11/03/meet-the-alt-lite-the-people-mainstreaming-the-alt-rights-white-nationalism/]
 

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Baffle2 said:
runic knight said:
yet that seems to be the acceptable answer nowadays.
Is it or isn't it? Don't sit on the fence, you'll get a sore bottom.

Tentative answers are annoying and should only be used in academia, where no one hears what you say anyway. Say it firmly, with conviction!
Sorry, I meant to imply that enough of the media has aligned itself to the notion that fighting racism with racism is the correct course, making the description of "it seems to be the correct answer" as apt a description to what is the acceptable norm in western culture as I could make without damning my position with a claim that it was the culturally accepted one (which wouldn't be true since as jon demonstrates by being just the latest in a long line of such rejections, there is a large and growing backlash to the notion.) So I suppose it would have been a little clearer to say something to the effect of "thanks to the media, it now seems acceptable culturally to fight racism with more racism". Though I would probably also feel the need to specify that the cultural acceptability applies along racist lines as well, as only those of left-leaning can acceptable be racist in the name of fighting racism, while those who are right leaning replying to that racism are not culturally accepted currently.

Though that is just rehashing jon point in his reply video about the hypocrisy of the current politically climate itself.

My personal views on it is not and never has been fence sitting on the subject. I personally think that racism used to fight racism is a stupid idea. Irrational and emotional retribution against a group of people because of their race because of what others of that race has done has never been a good idea, and the same applies to gender, sexuality, nationality, or other such traits of that fashion. I've argued against that line of reasoning for years on this site as well, so I am actually a little surprised that anyone would assume I don't oppose that line of emotional masturbation by now.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
runic knight said:
"Anytime someone brings up an uncomfortable statistic, you freak out, and burn things down." Jon, from the same video.
How's it uncomfortable, however?

I as an independently wealthy person (not 'rich') commit way more crimes than your average lower working class person.

Having money means getting away with more. Whether it's speeding, or doing drugs, tax evasion (I only got audited and this was an accident to begin with, before anybody starts) ... The more money you have the more immunity and options that you have. You think the working class poor would get away having done half the stuff that someone like Donald Trump has provenly done and not have the book thrown at them?

How many working class people could survive 3500 legal actions (incl. class actions) from everything from sexual assault, to willfully breaking contracts, etc? More over, even if only an eighth of them did represent some criminal aspect (remember, breach of contract alone is not a crime) ... still more court time than any working class person will likely see.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
Story said:
While I see Peterson's position on the issue of transgendered pronouns (in that use of them seems authoritarian and controlling) refusing to say them on request of the host is pretty disrespectful.
Peterson has said that he would use neutral pronouns if asked 'in a certain way', which i assume means politely.

Story said:
All that said what you posted didn't refute Skatologist's case (by that I mean the post he linked to). If anything it reaffirms it because by showing the video out of full context, you are suggesting that those protesters only interrupted him because they disagreed with his choice of pronouns but Appearently there is a lot more too it. Like the legal implications of it and the refusal to use them implies that he does not acknowledge that gender fluidity is valid. In general, it's trivializing the opponent...actually what Skatologist's warns about.
The only legal matter i can find that Peterson is involved with is his criticism of Bill C-16 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_Human_Rights_Act_and_the_Criminal_Code], which aims to "amend the Canadian Human Rights Act by adding "gender identity or expression" as a prohibited ground of discrimination".

Ill keep it short and say i think this bill should not become law.

And i do not think gender fluidity is valid. That shit can stay on Tumblr where it belongs.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
Baffle2 said:
gigastar said:
And i do not think gender fluidity is valid. That shit can stay on Tumblr where it belongs.
Why not?
I should clarify that i dont treat it as a valid identitiy. I would consider it a mental disorder.
 

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Addendum_Forthcoming said:
runic knight said:
"Anytime someone brings up an uncomfortable statistic, you freak out, and burn things down." Jon, from the same video.
How's it uncomfortable, however?

I as an independently wealthy person (not 'rich') commit way more crimes than your average lower working class person.

Having money means getting away with more. Whether it's speeding, or doing drugs, tax evasion (I only got audited and this was an accident to begin with, before anybody starts) ... The more money you have the more immunity and options that you have. You think the working class poor would get away having done half the stuff that someone like Donald Trump has provenly done and not have the book thrown at them?

How many working class people could survive 3500 legal actions (incl. class actions) from everything from sexual assault, to willfully breaking contracts, etc? More over, even if only an eighth of them did represent some criminal aspect (remember, breach of contract alone is not a crime) ... more court time than any working class person will likely see.
The stat cited on the very first page of this thread was that wealthy blacks commit more crime than poverty whites. People in the media and even in this very thread have pointed at it as they claim jon is racist. They are reacting to an uncomfortable statistic to make a claim attacking the character of the person who said it. This was the point jon was trying to demonstrate in his reply video as the downfall of the political climate. That when someone hears a stat that is inconvenient to what they want to believe, they refuse to accept it and instead attack the person saying it with claims like racism (attempting to use the implications of the stat itself being negative toward their opinions as evidence of siding with the complete opposition to their positions on the subjects such as race)

Your talks about your own personal wealth here is irrelevant to anything about that at all though. You as an example are nothing more than an anecdote as well, worthless without relevant context to the overall even if you were actually addressing anything that was being discussed in the first place.

At best it could be seen as making the stat as more potently noteworthy about differences in race, as your arguments here that richer people get away with more would certainly beg the question as to why blacks with the same amount of income commit more crimes. Honestly, it seems like you are supporting the same arguments people presumed jon was supporting when they were calling him racist.

Why you are mentioning Trump though has me wondering if you intentionally ignored reading the thread again. We get it, you hate republicans. What does that have to do with anything being talked about here?

Please stop intentionally derailing the thread solely to have excuse to rant.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,459
2,746
118
gigastar said:
I should clarify that i dont treat it as a valid identitiy. I would consider it a mental disorder.
I consider taking seriously what people say on YouTube the same way, so I guess we're all in the same boat. That is, you should stay on Tumblr, where you belong.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
BeetleManiac said:
gigastar said:
Why argue against an investigation if youre so sure nothings wrong?
Because I don't like pissing away money on frivolous bullshit.
Therefore you dont want tax money being paid out to people who go to teach students that all white people are racist?

BeetleManiac said:
When his defense of priests fucking boys got him in trouble
And thats all you had to say in the first place. Never mind that his apparent pedo apologia is his coping mechanism for what happened to him, i wouldnt have defended him if thats what you said.