Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This entire thread is about freedom of speech. "I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it", remember? Once we lose freedom of speech we lose everything.
I would keep in mind that there are very, very, very few Americans who would defend to the death anyone's right to say anything. It's a noble, but empty sentiment.
I would keep in mind that there are very, very, very few Americans who would defend to the death anyone's right to say anything. It's a noble, but empty sentiment.
That line is traditionally attributed to Voltaire, and it does embody Enlightenment values even if it's not always applied literally.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about the racial issues which are, literally, on the front burner today, and I wanted to say something about the statues, but I want to lead into that by telling you of an experience I had many years ago when I lived in Virginia. I often would visit the various Civil War Battlefields, and one day I was at a Union cemetery somewhere around Fredericksburg and I was walking among the graves. Right across the lane was a small Confederate Cemetery. To my surprise, a car pulled up and a family got out of the car and walked over to one of the Confederate graves, placed flowers on the grave, and then spent a few minutes praying. I was quite touched that more than a hundred years later a family was still remembering one of their ancestors. And it’s good to remember that every Confederate soldier was also a son, or a father, or a brother, or a grandchild that was loved by family members. There is virtually nothing in man’s history that is more disgusting or repugnant than the concept of slavery. And it is shameful (literally) that the Confederates forsook the true meaning of the New Testament to attempt to justify slavery (and justify it they did, not just through their actions as slave owners, but also in their articles of secession). Shame, shame, shame, forever shame.
Then we come to the issue of the statues. As a person who is interested in history, I have never understood why we honor traitors to our nation, traitors who fought and killed citizens who remained loyal to our nation. Yes, I realize it is part of the South’s attempt to portray its sordid history with the “Lost Cause” concept, which always fails. It seems inconceivable to me that there are Americans still waving the Confederate flag as if it is honorable. As far as I’m concerned, every Confederate statue should be taken down, but legally so*, and I think it would be appropriate for some of the statues to be placed in national battlefields and museums, with plaques and explanations that put them in perspective. History is still history. But then we get into another class of statue – Washington and Jefferson. Yes, these men owned slaves. Shame on them, as well. But is that the only measure of a man? Does the arguable fact that there was no single man more responsible for saving our nation during the Revolutionary War mean nothing as to how we look at George Washington? Does the fact that great Black civil rights leaders often quote/quoted Thomas Jefferson’s words as used in the Declaration Of Independence and his influence on the Constitution mean nothing as to how we look at Thomas Jefferson? If one thinks context is important, there is context here, as well.
Getting back to my asterisk in the previous paragraph. I’ve literally cheered as some of the statues of the likes of Jefferson Davis and Stonewall Jackson have come down. But on the other hand it bothers me that it’s being done illegally. If, in terms of principle, we say that one group of angry protesters have the right to tear down Confederate statues, what can we say – again, in terms of principle -- to a group of angry redneck protesters who might try to tear down statues of Martin Luther King? All I’m really saying is that the solutions to where we are, are not simple. They are complex. Are we sophisticated enough and principled enough to do the right thing, for the right reason, in the right way?
As an aside, some of you may find a series of You Tube videos to be quite interesting and informative. They are entitled “Uncomfortable Conversations With A Black Man”, hosted by Emmanuel Acho.
There are many YouTube videos by various darker skinned people that have a different POV than the typical BLM propaganda. CoLion Noir, Candace Owens, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and Larry elder are a few to check out. Oooops I left out Dinesh D'Disouza (sic?).
There are many YouTube videos by various darker skinned people that have a different POV than the typical BLM propaganda. CoLion Noir, Candace Owens, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and Larry elder are a few to check out. Oooops I left out Dinesh D'Disouza (sic?).
I think the OP is definitely on to something insidious taking place with free speech. While I don’t personally care much about statues one way or the other, what troubles me is the cancel / deplatform culture. People really aren’t that free to voice unpopular opinions, without risking serious repercussions, including losing their job.
The trouble is, real world problems are complicated, and require a lot of conversation. People don’t walk around with fully-formed understandings in their head... language is a part of how we think. We need to articulate our thoughts, try them out with different words, pair them with different reasons, bounce them off different individuals. It’s a process that means people are going to say dumb, uninformed things some times, but good for them. Unless they are a ideolog, they will learn something from the exchange. Their understanding of the nuance of the problem can improve, and they can get closer to truth. How is any of that supposed to happen if the immediate consequence for saying something remotely unpopular or misinformed is a mob assault to silence?
It’s a terrible trend, rearing it’s head highest on university campuses and twitter. It’s a minority, I suspect, but they are very loud and seem to have direct conduit to all the news media. If nobody says anything against it, and just remains complicit, it will get worse.
I’m a liberal and I’ve never voted Republican in my life, but I feel like the left has lost control of the car and it’s blowing past the exit we’ve all been aiming at for decades. Countries have gone down this road before, turning every narrative into one of victim/oppressor, but eventually the fallacies and oversimplification catch up with you and you end up with an implosion.
As a few quick examples.... is it really unthinkiable to believe that trans rights are crucial but perhaps a discussion about medical intervention in children is still warranted? Transphobe! Can one care deeply about equality and equal pay but still discuss the mainstream, peer-reviewed, multiply replicated science that shows how some pay differences are ineradicable so long as people are free to choose their profession? Misogynist! Can one believe that climate change is a huge issue facing our time but still discuss how solar and wind demonstrably fail to solve the problem? Right-wing nut bag! I can go on and on starting fires left and right, but the point is that nearly every issue people argue over is way more complicated than Right vs Left. It’s all about the details and the nuance. But how can we cut through the complexity and sort out what the heck is going on if we can’t talk about it? Are we actually interested in truth, or is that just a stand-in for loyalty to ideaology? Sometimes, I don’t know anymore.
You're also forgetting that the American government is of the people, for the people, and by the people. Citizen who are angry and protesting areWhat still citizens. (And there's insidious notion that's been hinted at or even outright said here, that Black protesters are all on welfare and don't pay taxes, which is so wrong.) It would be nice if protesters went through the bureaucratic process of getting these statues removed, but as others have brought up, there have been countless petitions and peaceful requests to remove these symbols that were soundly ignored by the respective governments, time after time.
What we have seen is the culmination of what, 6 years of more and more marginalizations and racism. The death of George Floyd happened at a time that people were already were facing more systematic racism. Covid-19 was two months in with lots of African-Americans getting seriously sick if not dying as a result of socio-economical issues. Finally, the gatekeepers of politicians have given to the African-American community. Many Floyds have died and nobody batted an eye, some were whites but now it went to a level of protest and frustration that even Michael Brown got. I think Floyd happened at a time that made it worse and more important to protest.
The riots I'm gonna say something weird, but I expected them. See 1992 had a similar issue. The Rodney King assault case came back with not guilty results for the police and an economic recession during the riots the night the jury submitted the verdict. Yes, just like the economic unrest due to Covid, 1992 had economic unrest with the H.W. Bush recession. Yes, a lot of it was infact the frustration of Rodney King, but people are far more likely to riot when the economy isn't on good ground. In 2020, we are in a recession due to Covid despite the stock market on a sugar high. Add in a very controversial crime and you got the right conditions for riots.
I think the largest problem with the "I disagree with your point but agree with your right to say it" (I am pretty sure I butchered the paraphrasing attempt) is the frustration. We are too polarized today. I am not sure why exactly we cannot agree whether you talk conservative, liberal or centrist (and beyond but those typically are marginal amounts) but we are and continue to listen to polarizing sources. Perhaps it is the source issues due to a lot of backfiring effect, confirmation biases and hostile media biases in viewpoints.
I think the OP is definitely on to something insidious taking place with free speech. While I don’t personally care much about statues one way or the other, what troubles me is the cancel / deplatform culture. People really aren’t that free to voice unpopular opinions, without risking serious repercussions, including losing their job.
I agree. Statues are not the issue; preserving is. I've never been sure with the term “cancel culture" means, despite my sons' best efforts to explain. If it means what I think it means, it is pure nihilism. In fact a lot of this movement is either anarchistic or nihilistic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmunkz
The trouble is, real world problems are complicated, and require a lot of conversation. People don’t walk around with fully-formed understandings in their head... language is a part of how we think. We need to articulate our thoughts, try them out with different words, pair them with different reasons, bounce them off different individuals. It’s a process that means people are going to say dumb, uninformed things some times, but good for them. Unless they are a ideolog, they will learn something from the exchange. Their understanding of the nuance of the problem can improve, and they can get closer to truth. How is any of that supposed to happen if the immediate consequence for saying something remotely unpopular or misinformed is a mob assault to silence?
It’s a terrible trend, rearing it’s head highest on university campuses and twitter. It’s a minority, I suspect, but they are very loud and seem to have direct conduit to all the news media. If nobody says anything against it, and just remains complicit, it will get worse.
The problem is facts. "No justice no peace" and “I can't breathe” do not blame themselves to ready debate. People slinging slogans loses if forced to defend his or her position. It is easier to scream or destroy property then to discuss the nuances of the evolution of British constitutional monarchy into American history. It is also difficult to discuss conditions in Africa in the 17th century and whether the slaves did worse or better than they would have done had they stayed in Africa. Or for that matter whether their descendants do better here or there. It is also easy to demonize western an American cultures because we do not tend to respond violently. Just triy discussing slavery in Saudi Arabia or Libya and see how long you remain safe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmunkz
I’m a liberal and I’ve never voted Republican in my life, but I feel like the left has lost control of the car and it’s blowing past the exit we’ve all been aiming at for decades. Countries have gone down this road before, turning every narrative into one of victim/oppressor, but eventually the fallacies and oversimplification catch up with you and you end up with an implosion.
I am also a liberal Democrat, but I have voted Republican on occasion. The modern Democcratic Party clearly has lost control over events. I cannot fathom how Americans would vote for the lights of the demonstrators in Minneapolis or Seattle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zmunkz
As a few quick examples.... is it really unthinkiable to believe that trans rights are crucial but perhaps a discussion about medical intervention in children is still warranted? Transphobe! Can one care deeply about equality and equal pay but still discuss the mainstream, peer-reviewed, multiply replicated science that shows how some pay differences are ineradicable so long as people are free to choose their profession? Misogynist! Can one believe that climate change is a huge issue facing our time but still discuss how solar and wind demonstrably fail to solve the problem? Right-wing nut bag! I can go on and on starting fires left and right, but the point is that nearly every issue people argue over is way more complicated than Right vs Left. It’s all about the details and the nuance. But how can we cut through the complexity and sort out what the heck is going on if we can’t talk about it? Are we actually interested in truth, or is that just a stand-in for loyalty to ideaology? Sometimes, I don’t know anymore.
For the reasons listed above, it is far easier to shout someone down rather than to oppose their positions and discuss them on the merits. As for climate change, when I point out that the mean temperature in Central Park (New York City) has not changed for many decades, I'm told that that is weather at best, or told that I am a reactionary pig at worst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
I think the largest problem with the "I disagree with your point but agree with your right to say it" (I am pretty sure I butchered the paraphrasing attempt) is the frustration. We are too polarized today.
With due respect, the problem is the Left's failure to debate facts. They are asserting feelings, which by their nature one can't argue with. Open discussion would prove them wrong on policy points.
since this thread is titled "fighting for unpopular views," not "fighting for unpopular statues,"
just what are the unpopular views that merit defending?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
by the way,
