Hall Of Fame
That's the trouble, they won't stop 😕Originally Posted by ragingpup
Hall Of Fame
Start with IBS He is the main instigator of wind up political threads. If he stopped posting questions that are deliberately aimed to cause controversy there would be a lot less political stuff on here. His latest 3 posts have have had 281 replies and about 6000 views which I'm sure gives him a big buzz even if it is annoying/ offensive to others.. Stop the idiot and reduce the politics I would say.It is very rare he posts a footy thread but I have noticed a rare one recently.
Last edited by rolymiller; 09-02-2018 at 05:24 PM.
Moderator
Ragingpup, I understand exactly where you're coming from regarding the Millers and things Rotherham in general. There are people that I know and trust who give me snippets of real info that I post from time to time but MillersMad keeps me informed as to what's happening in Rotherham.
The political side are threads that I enjoy as long as I get into them early and don't turn into essays although they are often good to read if you have the time.
IBS has been a member for many years and was a member under another name before IBS. He throws things into the mix that provoke reaction. It is amazing to me how differently people think and their approach to life.
When it's a slow footy day then there's always a place for this type of thread and to be honest they are read more than the football threads.
For me the best time for IBS was the speculation of where the stadium was to be built and the funding of the project but at that time there were 90 odd members logged on at any one time.
If it ever got that there were more O/T politic threads than football ones then it would need to be addressed
Hall Of Fame
The ultimate end of all this identity politics is mass murder, happened with Stalin, happened with Mao.
That's why it's important.
Hall Of Fame
Wow, sounds a bit melodramatic? Hysterical perhaps. See post 1.
Talk me through the logic of this then Fire. How exactly might it lead to mass murder, of whom, by whom? How might that chain of actions play out in our UK culture? Be specific.
Hall Of Fame
yes yes 2/10 gf keep going ...one begins with H another begins with M. Mid 20 th centuryish...you can do it...a clue NOT LEFTIES. We are not worried about spellings at this stage so have a go...no conferring with your pals thats cheating.
Last edited by rolymiller; 09-02-2018 at 09:29 PM.
International
He's here look. Bless his little cotton socks.
Hall Of Fame
Jordan Peterson says it more articulately than I can:
"We're making your group identity the most important thing about you. I think that is reprehensible. It is devastating. It is genocidal in its ultimate expression. I think it will bring down our civilization if we pursue it. We shouldn't be playing that game. So what is the alternative?"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...left_wins.html
Last edited by great_fire; 10-02-2018 at 02:31 AM.
Hall Of Fame
I think I can agree with the general thrust of what Peterson is saying: that if any group makes their collective race, ***ual identity the most important thing about you, it is not a good thing.
But it's a question of extents isn't it? And reactions from people not of their political identity.
On a basic level, is it a good thing for people who identify themselves in whatever group of people - let's say "Women" - to express their protest at what they perceive to be unfair/unequal treatment compared to other people in society. For example, the they should ask that they receive equal pay for doing the same job as a man?
Would you say that this is a fair and reasonable thing for "women" to ask for? And receive? Yes/no?
Moving on, and focusing on the movie that fundamental Christian movie Stardson posted about: it's on a very contentious theme about a form of 'therapy' that, objectively speaking, has been shown in some studies to cause harm to some people and has been banned in some countries. I've already stated that I am not against censor of this movie, so let's not go down that route - but does anyone who finds it offensive have a right to write to the cinema and advise them that they will withdraw their custom if they show it? Again, Yes/No?
And now further, do any of these protesters have a right to, if the film gets the go ahead and is shown, to gather at the door with placards (should they get rushed permission from the authorities to do so!) and stand peacefully, with placards summarising their opposition to the film? Yes/no?
Further still - do these same protesters have a right to verbally abuse anyone who wants to go and see the film? Or push/kick them? Or damage the cinema? Yes/no?
I think the exact same questions can be asked about any 'identity' group - I would argue that the vast majority of any such group are peaceful, rational, normal people who are aware of their identity, their particular cultural differences and where these differences are discriminated against by wider society, either just accept it (as the majority of us lazy people do - to much other stuff to do!) or at most, write letters/tweets etc expressing their feelings and occasionally, if they feel strong enough, form an action group for protests that are, from the VAST majority of such people, peaceful. This isn't something that I engage with but, as long as they keep their expressions peaceful and lawful, surely we can agree that they have a right to do so? Yes/No?
But to talk of Stalin? Mao? Mass murder?? The whole point of me posting this (for me) one off thread was to provoke thought about what I think are huge, hysterical over reactions to normal, peaceful people some of whom are engaging in peaceful arguments for what they believe in that, crucially, cause no harm to any other person.
Of course you get isolated d*ckheads in every 'movement' that take it too far (the Mogg protesters on the left, the race hate criminals on the right) but for the most part it's just the ebb and flow of society and personally I rather weary of your relentless hysteria on the matter. Hence this thread. You gret jessie!
Hall Of Fame
That's an interesting theory, albeit quite fanciful.
I think the key difference between us is that you and a few others on here, appear to see identity politics all over the place. Where are all these 'socialist lesbians' of which you speak? Where are the vast hordes of black socialists that are organising protests on race?
I simply don't see any? Where do you see them?
I remember the 70s and although there was a stronger union membership and probably a stronger awareness of workers rights, I certainly don't remember a 'genuinely revolutionary zeal'. Outside of the trade unions, the vast majority of people just got in with the struggles of their own lives.
I think the rise of such vigorous expressions from the right is a much more recent development and is more to do with the mass preoccupation of Brexit, the divisive nature of the mass media and the focus on immigration. This is particularly resonant in Northern towns where immigration has been scandalously mismanaged from several governments. And unfortunately, as you look at many of the more extreme web sites that promote the ideas of a threat to our own national identity, one notices that intensity of their hostility to the left - as if whole 'problem' of mismanagement of immigration is the fault of lefties and that we lefties are the real enemy with our tendency to prioritise human rights, be more accepting of other cultures.
And of course, the local population playing their own type of 'identity politics' have every right to express their concerns. I have no problem with articulate exploration of the cultural challenges we face. But I am sick and tired of the hysterical, simplistic wailing that is going on from the right wingers on this site in response to every little change that society makes. If you don't like it, tweet yourself to the people that are relevant - don't just screech about fascist states, lack of free speech and black lesbian despots forming concentration camps.
It ain't a good look...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote