I don't do facebook, so I wouldn't be aware of any new rules. You seem to think that your right to free speech has been taken away, so give me an example of what you could say before but can't say now.Originally Posted by navypie
Hall Of Fame
I don't do facebook, so I wouldn't be aware of any new rules. You seem to think that your right to free speech has been taken away, so give me an example of what you could say before but can't say now.
Trialist
The hate speach rule change is not something I have paid too much attention to, but there is also the problem how Facebook moderators act depending on the political leanings of the poster.
You night want to look into Project Veritas https://www.projectveritas.com/news/...-in-elections/
Hall Of Fame
I night, but then again I night not. A quick google search tells me that "Project Veritas is an American right-wing activist group".
Not really something I'd pay a lot of attention to, do you have any less biased sources?
Trialist
What, like the Guardian? All media organisations are biased, they all have an agenda and they push that regardless of the facts of the situation. If you only listen to one side of the bias you will not know what is actually going on.
Hall Of Fame
So you appear to dismiss The Guardian, but post a link to an American right-wing activist group.
Nice one!
Trialist
I assume you will get all your views from the Guardian because you assume they are a trusted source, but they are just another agenda driven outlet, this time left wing. The Guardian will and does lie to put their agenda to you. The same with ALL media outlets, it is the agenda that is important to them, not the news.
The only way you can get any idea of what is going on is to look on how both sides report on the issue.
One other thing that is interesting. You automatically see Right Wing as bad but Left Wing as good says something about the person you are that you automatically condemn half the population.
Hall Of Fame
BLM has always been run by Marxists
The whole range of intersectional insanity commonly known as identity politics stems from critical theory, which was elaborated by Marxist philosophers. Simply put they realised in the 1970s that they were losing the economic argument so applied Marxist theory to society rather than economics.
Some strands of classical Marxism are clearly visible, just swap the world being built on economic oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie for the social (and subsequently economic) oppression of weaker groups by stronger groups.
This kind of thinking has spread through Anglo-Saxon culture via academia and journalism and is now in a strong enough position to be able to attempt to become mainstream.
The solutions proposed are Marxist in nature too. It's not about equality ie giving people equal opportunities and leaving it up to them, it's about equity or in other words making sure everyone has the same.
To illustrate the point, immigrant kids from chaotic homes in Sweden getting free breakfast and dinner and a quiet place to study is equal opportunity. US universities being pressured into a policy of making sure everyone leaves with the same level of education (ie concentrating time and resources on weaker student to the detriment of stronger ones rather than making sure everyone fulfills their potential) is equity.
Something similar also happened in Italy in the 1970s during the 'years of lead' when faculties were taken over by far left groups and professors were ordered to scrap exams and instead hold seminars, then give every student 27/30 regardless of whether they had studied, or even spoken. Several professors who refused were taken hostage until they complied or assaulted (at my university one principled professor was kneecapped).
It prioritises the subjective over the objective, so lived experience over debate, in fact no challenging of other people's versions of reality is allowed. The extent to which a voice should be heard depends on how many intersectional oppression points the speaker has, not the rationality of what they have to say. Being a black male to female trans***ual seems to put you at the top of the tree, regardless of what you say.
They actively and overtly oppose STEM subjects which may be able to contradict their theories with objective data. Social sciences on the other hand are acceptable precisely because they have been taken over by critical theory.
They use carrot-and-stick cult like techniques such as false dichotomies (support us or be seen as racist, "silence is violence" etc) and deliberately vague terminology and definitions to appear desirable to as many people as possible.
If you consider yourself a white ally of BLM you are taking a very big gamble that when the time of reckoning comes your cooperation will help erase your original sin of being a white male. I don't think it will. I think they will go after you with the same fervour they go after your mutual enemies today.
Hall Of Fame
I'd give your crystal ball a polish if I were you, because you are hopeless with your assumptions. The only time I ever read The Guardian is when it is linked on here. I get most of my news from mainstream TV - BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 news programmes. I would never visit the EDL website, just as I would never visit the SWP website because I don't like extremism from whatever side.
Again you are talking complete bollox. I don't "automatically see Right Wing as bad but Left Wing as good", I automatically see bad things as bad and good things as good, whether they are left, right or centre. The funny thing is that you claim to look at all sides of the argument in a fair and rational way, but conclude that an American right-wing activist group are the ones to believe!.
Hall Of Fame
When have you been polite to me recently? do yer own research.
Hall Of Fame
You said "we all had the right to free speech until the BLM movement was hijacked by the Marxists". What particular right do you personally think has been taken away from you? What could you say before that you can't say now?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote