Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

Everyone's a Victim

Recommended Posts

Just now, dialamah said:

What I don't get is when person A expresses and opinion, person B disagrees and person A says "You are trying to shut me down!  How dare you, you snowflake!".   Which is what I see happening a lot.

I do think universities, especially, should not cancel controversial events - boycotting by those who disagree, or even polite and non-violent rallying is fine by me, should be allowed.   

Although, I do recall that guy who was going to present on how to 'get' women by appearing genuine; I thought it was ok to shut that down because it seemed misogynistic to assume that a man had a right to pretty much any women he wanted and that it was acceptable to game her to achieve his goals.   Seems the presenter promoted some use of force, as well as charm and money, in his techniques.

I don't get that either.  Disagreement is simply the other side of the free speech coin.  Laws differ country by country, but when I opine on the issue, I'm of the opinion that the US has it closest to being right, with their First Amendment.  I'm all in favour of Antifa counter protesting White Supremacists, (done it myself) but if only one of the two groups employs violence, then they are in the wrong, regardless of which group it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Argus said:

It might, perhaps, have escaped your notice, but the conservatives are not in power right now. It's a bit odd you complaining they aren't taking action when they're not in power. Do you propose armed insurrection? Liberals do? Well the Liberals have been in power now for some time. Can you provide a brief list of the things they have done? I know it will be brief,  because like the Trump administration, they can't seem to get anything done at all. Not anything of real importance, anyway. Oh, please do let me know what they're doing about health care, aborigines and the legal system because as far as I know they're completely confused about them all.

 

I don't care a lot about what political parties do or don't. I was talking about small-l and small-c liberals and conservatives. Small-l liberals are active, often activist, as are most people on the left, where small-c conservatives are passive. They expect that a strong, firm-but-fair Daddy state will maintain order and all that's needed from citizens is obedience. Laws, for example- conservatives see most social problems as solvable by legislation. If you should do something, there needs to be a law that you must. If you shouldn't do something, there needs to be a law that you can't. Unfortunately, many of those shoulds and shouldn'ts are religious or moral and have no place in the law. Liberals, for the past while, have been engaged in tossing out bad laws. Gay marriage was the last cause, pot (and all drug) laws are the current one, and I predict assisted suicide will be the next.

It's just another way liberals and conservatives are different. Liberals are all about individual rights, conservatives about designing society.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

None of those seem to be 'flipping out'. They just seem to be pointing out things they're dissatisfied with or don't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagreeing, being angry or frustrated is being a "snowflake".  People on the right are rarely offended by differing opinions and when they are, they don't require councelling or safe spaces.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Grand Mal said:

I don't care a lot about what political parties do or don't. I was talking about small-l and small-c liberals and conservatives. Small-l liberals are active, often activist, as are most people on the left, where small-c conservatives are passive. They expect that a strong, firm-but-fair Daddy state will maintain order and all that's needed from citizens is obedience. Laws, for example- conservatives see most social problems as solvable by legislation. If you should do something, there needs to be a law that you must. If you shouldn't do something, there needs to be a law that you can't. Unfortunately, many of those shoulds and shouldn'ts are religious or moral and have no place in the law. Liberals, for the past while, have been engaged in tossing out bad laws. Gay marriage was the last cause, pot (and all drug) laws are the current one, and I predict assisted suicide will be the next.

The basic point of liberalism in Canada, it seems to me, is a Marxist belief in income redistribution and big brother government equalizing all things and taking care of all problems. So naturally liberals, or people you call liberals (who aren't classical liberals at all) are always zealous advocates of government righting all wrongs and bringing justice to all injustices - and they regard anyone having more money than others, or better health care, or bigger homes, or a better lives than others as an injustice. So yes, they're always earnestly agitating for government to fix everything they think needs to be fixed, however minute the issue is, like 'microagressions' or gender pronouns. Conservatives, naturally enough, are basically more live and let live, believe in personal responsibility, and don't look to government to take care of everything. That doesn't mean they're passive. It just means they're not always screaming for mommy to take care of their issues. In fact, the usual problem they have with government is there's too much of it, it does too much government should not be doing, and it does it too expensively and too inefficiently while sticking its nose into too many places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Pretty broad definition there.  By that definition everyone on MLW is a snowflake.   Ok.

My bad, left out one word - "not", i'm not surprised by your confusion.

Disagreeing, being angry or frustrated is not being a "snowflake".  People on the right are rarely offended by differing opinions and when they are, they don't require councelling or safe spaces

Edited by Hal 9000
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hal 9000 said:

People on the right are rarely offended by differing opinions

Sure they are, constantly.  They're offended by "Happy Holidays", by subsidized childcare, by women who work instead of staying home the kids, by abortion, by any religious practice or belief that's not Christian, by custom that doesn't derive from White Anglo Saxon Protestant history.  They're offended by the idea that women, gays, people of color and poor people"s experiences are different than that of a white male.  

As for "safe spaces", conservatives are the ones demanding that "white" society be dominant and that we return to the 50s so they don"t have to deal with people who don't look like them, or ideas that are different than their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Sure they are, constantly.  They're offended by "Happy Holidays", by subsidized childcare, by women who work instead of staying home the kids, by abortion, by any religious practice or belief that's not Christian, by custom that doesn't derive from White Anglo Saxon Protestant history.  They're offended by the idea that women, gays, people of color and poor people"s experiences are different than that of a white male.  

As for "safe spaces", conservatives are the ones demanding that "white" society be dominant and that we return to the 50s so they don"t have to deal with people who don't look like them, or ideas that are different than their own.

I guess I should have stipulated the difference between words and actions - I thought it was implied, sorry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

I guess I should have stipulated the difference between words and actions - I thought it was implied, sorry!

OK, we're much more clear here and probably closer to a definition that makes more sense.  The only think I would agree with is if they are shutting down those opinions solely because they 'don't like them'.  Also, 'shutting down' specifically means seeking out actions from authorities to prevent expression of free speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-09-16 at 1:31 PM, Michael Hardner said:

Well that's a new one on me.  If we're talking about semantics, most people equate snowflakes and being easily offended, including:

Scriblett's status update from Sept 8 says it:

"SNOWFLAKE ALERT: UC  Berkeley is offering 'Support And Counseling' For Students Offended By Shapiro's Speech .  Poor babies, UC not a university anymore, it's a baby sitting service."

taxme - June 22nd:
"
I am notoffended at all. I ain't nosnowflake "

"It would appear as though the sensibilities of thesnowflake main scream liberal media were hurt andoffended. "
 

BC - June 22nd:
"..just like theoffendedsnowflakes."

Impact, Feb 3rd:
"only
snowflakes would beoffended by it. "

Just like you called all out righties on "that other forum" that don't agree with you. 

Most ppl do equate the term with being easily offended. That is why it was coined and applied to leftists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-09-16 at 6:23 PM, Michael Hardner said:

We have police to deal with criminals, right ?  Kind of a spiral logic going on here.

Breaking the law is beside the point. Now this. ^^^

What kind of spiral logic going on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dialamah said:

Sure they are, constantly.  They're offended by "Happy Holidays",

They're only offended by it in that it's an attempt to ignore that the Christmas Season is a Christian holiday and festival. They're offended by stupidity, in other words, and twisting yourself around like a pretzel so as not to offend people who came to a Christian country but might not want to see or hear anything about Christians. 

Quote

by subsidized childcare, by women who work instead of staying home the kids,

I don't know anyone who is offended by either of those things.

Quote

by abortion, by any religious practice or belief that's not Christian,

There are some Christians who don't believe in abortion - also Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus and Jews. I don't think anyone is offended by religious practice that aren't Christian unless they involve the open degradation of women or violence.

Quote

by custom that doesn't derive from White Anglo Saxon Protestant history.

Name one.

Quote

 They're offended by the idea that women, gays, people of color and poor people"s experiences are different than that of a white male.  

I've never met anyone who thinks womens experiences aren't different from that of men or gay experiences aren't different from straights. This is all imaginary nonsense.

Quote

As for "safe spaces", conservatives are the ones demanding that "white" society be dominant and that we return to the 50s so they don"t have to deal with people who don't look like them, or ideas that are different than their own.

No, conservatives just believe in self-reliance and individual freedoms and don't share the deep shame progressives and liberals have in being White and a member of Western society. They believe in merit, and welcome anyone who is as capable and skilled as they are, but don't believe in promoting or hiring or expressing admiration for people simply based on their race, religion, ethnicity or gender  because that would be silly and brainless. They also don't believe in hand-wringing apologies for what our ancestors did to someone else's ancestors.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/09/2017 at 12:44 PM, Argus said:

Well, except for straight white men, of course. They're the oppressors. I see Blacks are rioting again in St. Louis because a judge, after examining the evidence, has concluded that a white cop that shot a black drug dealer did not commit murder. This goes against the narrative created on social media by the outraged black victims groups,  of which there are now a myriad. That poor heroin dealer, racing away from police and ramming police cars to get away is a victim of evil white men!

Halifax has caved to a shrill group of whiny aboriginal 'victim's' and their progressive fellow travelers in shrouding a statue of its own founder. The premier of Nova Scotia demands the statue itself be removed, while the nearby town of Kent has removed his name on their bridge. His crime, apparently, was fighting back against savage Mc'maq attacks on white people. Damn white people! In fact, a huge and burgeoning native victims industry exists, dedicated to ensuring all white people apologize repeatedly for everything bad that ever happened to natives, admit nothing was natives' faults, and pay huge sums to make things up to them.

In BC, some woman is suing UBC for not expelling a man she accused of sexually assaulting her, which caused her such anguish and stress that she says they've discriminated against her due to 'mental disability', ie, the anguish and stress. She reported it to the police, who declined to lay charges, citing a lack of evidence. Evidence apparently, should not be considered necessary for a university to take action against any man a woman claims was cruel to her. She's so anguished she keeps showing up in major newspapers, posing dramatically, always looking very victimy. All women on campus are a victim of rape culture, you know, or so the womens victim industry would have it.

Meanwhile, academics wring their hands about the lack of women getting STEM professorships. Since women are obviously victims, this must be due to male sexism,  even though most women don't seem much interested in taking STEM courses at all.

Meanwhile our harping media people are wailing about the rise in 'hate attacks' on Muslims, despite the numbers being miniscule, and have already dubbed all Muslims, like all minorities, victims of evil white hatred and discrimination. They're the newest victim group adopted by progressives, those that aren't busy desperately trying to build support for a law executing anyone who refuses to use a self-declared trans-gendered person's chosen identity pronoun. 

Everyone's a victim. And to them, I dedicate this song.

I turn on the tube and what do I see
A whole lotta people cryin' "Don't blame me"
They point their crooked little fingers at everybody else
Spend all their time feelin' sorry for themselves
Victim of this, victim of that
Your momma's too thin; your daddy's too fat
Get over it
Get over it
All this whinin' and cryin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash
But you might feel better if they gave you some cash
The more I think about it, Old Billy was right
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight
You don't want to work; you want to live like a king
But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing
Get over it
Get over it
If you don't want to play, then you might as well split
Get over it, get over it
It's like going to confession every time I hear you speak
You're makin' the most of your losin' streak
Some call it sick, but I call it weak
You drag it around like a ball and chain
You wallow in the guilt; you wallow in the pain
You wave it like a flag, you wear it like a crown
Got your mind in the gutter, bringin' everybody down
Complain about the present and blame it on the past
I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass
Get over it
Get over it
All this bitchin' and moanin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it
 
The Eagles

 

 

Good tune.

Ohhhh ... Aaaaaaarrrrrrrguuusss ... You are the complainingest person around here.

Sing it to your mirror.

 

Funny you didn't mention the people entitled to complain:

6 Muslims shot dead by a white fanatic in Montreal ... for being Muslims.

And a protester against fascists mowed down dead by a wannabe Nazi. 

Get over it?

Edited by jacee
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jacee said:

6 Muslims shot dead by a white fanatic in Montreal ... for being Muslims.

And a protester against fascists mowed down dead by a wannabe Nazi. 

But there's that "Merry Christmas" thing Dialamah pointed out...  People (I'm not calling them 'snowflakes') get offended by that.  People get mad at a MOTION condemning oppression of an identifiable group.  These same people somehow think that Sharia law is going to be swept in.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...