It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

My rant on Fake News

page: 12
32
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It's an easy analogy for everyone. Pull your pantaloons out of your crack.




posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



I'm saying censorship tends to send certain speech underground where it festers, as opposed to having it defeated in the marketplace of ideas. I am saying censorship of hate speech does not work.

Exactly. You're making the case that by fighting against hate speech, people are allowing for this to happen. That modern supremacist groups might flourish because they weren't allowed to speak openly and freely

But, of course they are free to meet, speak - openly and publicly - and will continue to be free to do so for the foreseeable future

Are you saying that they're being persecuted?


I specifically said censorship of hate speech. I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship, for instance the KKK rally in California earlier this year. Yes, that would be persecution.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

It's easier for you to use, but that says more about you than anyone else. Put on your big-girl pants.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I specifically said censorship of hate speech. I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship, for instance the KKK rally in California earlier this year. Yes, that would be persecution.


You were originally responding to ketsuko, who was commenting on the use of the word Deplorables and how it eventually ends up being ineffective:

While we're on the subject of Nazis and censorship, the Weimar Republic had fairly modern hate-speech laws. Nazis such as Goebbels and Streicher were censored and prosecuted for their anti-Semitic views before the Nazis rose to power, affording them the attention they might not have had in a climate of free and open debate.

How was Ms. Clinton calling people deplorable not participating openly and publicly - engaging the public - using free speech?

It was this that prompted you to suggest that censorship of hate speech only enables the rise of hate groups. How is that coercion, violence or censorship?

The KKK rally was an open brawl - that began because of a few lawless individuals. It's not censorship. How do you confuse the two?

Persecution? Really?

It's almost as if you mean to lead people to believe that by openly speaking out against hate speech, and hate groups that that is censorship and persecution, when in fact it's only free speech

When you say :


I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship...


That is really pretty interesting. To me at least :-)

edit on 11/27/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: less confusion



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If you oppose my viewpoint, you're a Nazi.

If you have the potential to oppose my viewpoint, you're a Nazi.

If you actually are a Nazi, well, never mind. I'm too busy equating political disagreement with the real victims of the Nazi's, cheapening their experience and exposing my thinking, and that of others who do the same, for the privileged, out-of-touch, arrogant, poorly educated, first-world complainer that I am.





I don't want this point (Highlighted) to get lost...It's an important one.

The very act of trivializing the term 'Nazi' by using it in such a frivolous and childish manner, marginalizes the very real victims of TRUE Nazi's...while diluting the memory of the horrific nature of the TRUE Nazis, as well as despicable crimes they perpetrated upon these victims.

THIS is hateful in result and selfish in use.

Should this false/frivolous labeling be censored ?--No...not in my opinion.
People still have every right to be thoughtless and selfish...just as they also still have the right to develop a personal awareness of when they are behaving in such a manner.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I specifically said censorship of hate speech. I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship, for instance the KKK rally in California earlier this year. Yes, that would be persecution.


You were originally responding to ketsuko, who was commenting on the use of the word Deplorables and how it eventually ends up being ineffective:

While we're on the subject of Nazis and censorship, the Weimar Republic had fairly modern hate-speech laws. Nazis such as Goebbels and Streicher were censored and prosecuted for their anti-Semitic views before the Nazis rose to power, affording them the attention they might not have had in a climate of free and open debate.

How was Ms. Clinton calling people deplorable not participating openly and publicly - engaging the public - using free speech?

It was this that prompted you to suggest that censorship of hate speech only enables the rise of hate groups. How is that coercion, violence or censorship?

The KKK rally was an open brawl - that began because of a few lawless individuals. It's not censorship. How do you confuse the two?

Persecution? Really?

It's almost as if you mean to lead people to believe that by openly speaking out against hate speech, and hate groups that that is censorship and persecution, when in fact it's only free speech

When you say :


I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship...


That is really pretty interesting. To me at least :-)


Once again, I was speaking of censorship of hate speech, not "speaking out against" hate speech. There is no need to try and conflate the two.

Then again, name calling is the basest form of propaganda, and convinces no one but the most obtuse and tribalistic. If name-calling is "speaking out" in your eyes, then yes I would argue you are attempting to censor, or at least to end the conversation, in demonizing people, which leads to persecution.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT


The very act of trivializing the term 'Nazi' by using it in such a frivolous and childish manner, marginalizes the very real victims of TRUE Nazi's...while diluting the memory of the horrific nature of the TRUE Nazis, as well as despicable crimes they perpetrated upon these victims.


I disagree. It trivializes nothing

It's a standard, symbolic - a metaphor

People see what's happening in our country right now differently. This much is obvious

If people had seen the signs earlier on in Germany - and spoken out? Who knows how different things might have been. History might repeat itself - but never exactly. People are right to speak up

I know people who had family that were killed in the holocaust. They are way past concerned and wondering how to explain these things happening now to their grand kids

This isn't done lightly. It's not very comforting to hear so many trivialize things that should be red flags for all of us



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

...and, respectfully, I disagree with your disagreement.

Calling a poster on ATS with whom you disagree...a "Nazi"...is NOT preventing the FOURTH Reich! It's trivializing the horrific nature of the THIRD!
edit on 27-11-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



Once again, I was speaking of censorship of hate speech, not "speaking out against" hate speech. There is no need to try and conflate the two.

No, in fact you weren't. You absolutely suggested that certain people weren't interested in or capable of keeping it in the realm of free speech. You were the one that made the leap to censorship. You were the one that said the KKK was being persecuted

It's all right there


Then again, name calling is the basest form of propaganda, and convinces no one but the most obtuse and tribalistic. If name-calling is "speaking out" in your eyes, then yes I would argue you are attempting to censor, or at least to end the conversation, in demonizing people, which leads to persecution.

I'm not interested in ending this conversation - this is just getting good :-)

And now I'm censoring? Who - you? No way man - please, by all means - speak your mind

Names are just words, right? I thought we were supposed to not be concerned with all that anymore

If calling supremacists that speak out against all manner of good folk deplorable is a crime - then I'm all in. Names - called

Anyhow, what are you afraid of Les? We're just talking.

:-)



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

...and, respectfully, I disagree with your disagreement.

Calling a poster on ATS with whom you disagree...a "Nazi"...is NOT preventing the FOURTH Reich! It's trivializing the horrific nature of the THIRD!


I thought you agreed that I didn't. LOL



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

...and, respectfully, I disagree with your disagreement.

Calling a poster on ATS with whom you disagree...a "Nazi"...is NOT preventing the FOURTH Reich! It's trivializing the horrific nature of the THIRD!


I thought you agreed that I didn't. LOL


Luv ya, Kali...but not always about you. I'm speaking in general terms.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT




Calling a poster on ATS with whom you disagree...a "Nazi"...is NOT preventing the FOURTH Reich! It's trivializing the horrific nature of the THIRD!

Oh, it just might. Shame is something society has been using as a tool for a very long time

It trivializes nothing. Again - you should consider who you're talking to, and who might be listening. There are real people with real histories that see what's happening in this country for what it is

Politeness - political correctness - is all that's keeping people from shouting it out even louder and more often

It's people being afraid to speak the truth until it's too damn late that's the real problem

And, anyhow - who called someone here a Nazi?

:-)
edit on 11/27/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



Once again, I was speaking of censorship of hate speech, not "speaking out against" hate speech. There is no need to try and conflate the two.

No, in fact you weren't. You absolutely suggested that certain people weren't interested in or capable of keeping it in the realm of free speech. You were the one that made the leap to censorship. You were the one that said the KKK was being persecuted

It's all right there


Then again, name calling is the basest form of propaganda, and convinces no one but the most obtuse and tribalistic. If name-calling is "speaking out" in your eyes, then yes I would argue you are attempting to censor, or at least to end the conversation, in demonizing people, which leads to persecution.

I'm not interested in ending this conversation - this is just getting good :-)

And now I'm censoring? Who - you? No way man - please, by all means - speak your mind

Names are just words, right? I thought we were supposed to not be concerned with all that anymore

If calling supremacists that speak out against all manner of good folk deplorable is a crime - then I'm all in. Names - called

Anyhow, what are you afraid of Les? We're just talking.

:-)


I never said the KKK was being persecuted. I said coercion, violence and censorship is persecution. That includes all ideologies, including the KKK, of which I gave as an example. Your seruptitious attempt to paint me as a defender of the KKK, and not against persecution en masse, is duly noted. But that's exactly what we're talking about with the whole attempt to paint people as KKK defenders and Nazi sympathizers, groups who ironically use the little ploys at slander and censorship that you use.

Deplorable is an adjective. Deplorables is a noun. One describes and one labels. No one is opposing you for calling hate speech deplorable, but are opposing you for labelling people for the purposes of demonization, another Nazi behavior. If you had your grammar right, and cared about your language, you might not resort to this irrational thinking.



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I never said the KKK was being persecuted.

You did actually:


I don't think those "fighting against hate speech" are willing destroy it in open debate, with free speech, but tend to oppose it with coercion, violence, and censorship, for instance the KKK rally in California earlier this year. Yes, that would be persecution.

Are you saying that you used that actual event with actual klan members as an example for no good reason? Why include it? What did you really mean?


Your seruptitious attempt to paint me as a defender of the KKK, and not against persecution en masse, is duly noted.

You know what I duly noted? That you don't defend the rights of people to criticize hate speech without implying that they are for censorship. Tit - for tat. Please see your quote above and explain how I have it wrong


But that's exactly what we're talking about with the whole attempt to paint people as KKK defenders and Nazi sympathizers, groups who ironically use the little ploys at slander and censorship that you use.

Who did I slander? Who did I censor?


No one is opposing you for calling hate speech deplorable, but are opposing you for labelling people for the purposes of demonization, another Nazi behavior.

Are you calling me a Nazi Les? Are you demonizing me? :-)


If you had your grammar right, and cared about your language, you might not resort to this irrational thinking.

Yes Les, that's the ticket. While defending unpopular causes, we should be careful to always mind our grammar. It's our first best defense against irrational thinking



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree, there are tons of complete leftist morons parroting this propaganda. Why is it always people on the far left that are devoid of brain cells?

It's always the usual suspects too. Makes me wonder why they even participate in sites like this/



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I agree, there are tons of complete leftist morons parroting this propaganda. Why is it always people on the far left that are devoid of brain cells?

It's always the usual suspects too. Makes me wonder why they even participate in sites like this/



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 10:56 PM
link   
The real problem is there is fake news coming from both sides

I want to give an example of each.

First from the left




Now one from the right


I got duped on this one so I am painfully aware of it.

News can be propaganda and propaganda can be news, this is a real problem in 2016

edit on 27-11-2016 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2016 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Once we even start censoring what some consider "fake", we open the door to abuse and censorship that impacts us all.

Give me fake news with everything else any day of the week.

I'd rather have more freedom and the associated risks than less.



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Let's just teach people math=sh#t and reading is for idiots and let's teach that there is only one planet and it's called Earth and we should have news that is 100% false and no one should even know what country they're in or if they are alive or dead. Because disinformation should be protected and retarding ourselves should be considered a sacred part of the first amendment.

Or the right wing could stop trying to use free speech as an excuse to dumb people down.
edit on 28-11-2016 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

Spoken like a true authoritarian.

"Or the right wing could stop trying to use free speech as an excuse to dumb people down."

So I can safely assume that you are against free speech, like most of the leftists.

Thank you for proving and validating my premise.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join