This past year has taught me that some people don't learn at all. Like the guy who put pro-BLM signage on his store...and his store still got smashed up by BLM rioters...and he didn't fault them for it nor change his opinion about BLM.
Tim recently did a video on this and he also said fuck these guys. He said a long time ago he would be defending these people but now he's realized these fuckers are standing in the way of actual free speech.
Left wing hall monitors like these assholes need to be purged. They're directly trying to remove my free speech rights. Fuck'em.
I hit my limit at this Chinese Virus. People talking about things that could save lives was being censored to make sure Orange Man Bad.
I was a free speech absolutist. Everything is fair game. But, expect me to support someone's free speech for them to thank me by advocating my speech be taken? Fuck that.
Carl Sagan used to talk about the Golden Rule, some more virtuous versions, and some less virtuous (but perhaps more practical) ones. There's the Brazen Rule: "Do unto others as they have done unto you", and the Iron Rule: "Do unto others as you like, before they do it unto you."
That sounds like a great way to turn people into passive slaves. "Just sit there and take it or god will wag his finger at you after you're dead and gone".
I never understood the "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" saying. It's pretending like there aren't selfish assholes (with both eyes) out there striking first and going for the eyes of others. Defending yourself and striking back is going to make everyone blind how exactly?
The only way for it to be possible to break the cycle of reciprocal violence is for people to abstain from participating in it, even at the cost of martyrdom.
"An eye for an eye implies you've severely failed in your efforts to de-eye your opponent. How can someone with no eyes best you and remove your eyes?"
An eye for an eye leaves a one-eyed man and a blind man. And in the world of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
To be fair this is what I’m telling my daughter. They teach the golden rule at school. I tell her if that kid is going to be mean to her she can be mean back. You start out nice but if it’s not reciprocated, screw em. I don’t want her getting abused her whole life because of this mindset.
Fuck their learning. I don't want them to learn, I want them to finally be punished for all the evil shit they've done. At this point, silencing liberals is a matter of self preservation.
I disagree. We're don't make society better by becoming like them in this regard. The focus should be on bettering society not fucking up "the censors."
Sooner we can stop doing this stupid, to me, "left" vs "right" ideology and move on to ...hell, at least more accurate terms that define what we're really believed... the more true progress society will make.
For instance, both "sides" want progress so the term progressive is a misnomer. Esso when they're taking us back into ethnic identity based tribalism.
I could do a while bit on this. How technically "right-wing" means hereditary rule, hierarchy, conformity, etc and very few people who get labeled that ate even ate off its meaning and less that agree with it. How the...boy, almost said "left" its insidious isn't it? How the...well, in this case it might make sense, the "left", as in the more humanist liberals from 50-100 years ago pushed the terms, like they do with most (as they realized that language can be a weapon and labeling your "Alt-Right" opponents as all Nazis and the rest of the 70% of that movement "Alt-Lite" of course turns your opponent, who just win an election, into something that few want to be associated with, etc etc.
But point being: we don't have to encourage censorship, just discourage hypocrisy and only one group being able to express themselves.
Basically, maybe you're right but if both parties are silenced, who does that leave in power? Just the neoliberal Uniparty. And thus the "both sides at once" meme...that I pushed hard leading up to Jan 6th... that went precisely nowhere. Lol
I really wish people would stop with the "i'll defend your right to free speech even though you'd deny me mine"
Just stop it, the only way theyre gonna learn is when the monster turns on its creators.
This past year has taught me that some people don't learn at all. Like the guy who put pro-BLM signage on his store...and his store still got smashed up by BLM rioters...and he didn't fault them for it nor change his opinion about BLM.
"Why would Trump do this?!"
"They smashed your fucking store!"
"Yeah, well, they're just a little misguided, is all. They're good kids. I'm sure they just need a little time to reflect."
Cucks like this are why we need to wall up that city. It breeds them.
Sometimes you cannot tell the people. You must show them.
Tim recently did a video on this and he also said fuck these guys. He said a long time ago he would be defending these people but now he's realized these fuckers are standing in the way of actual free speech.
Left wing hall monitors like these assholes need to be purged. They're directly trying to remove my free speech rights. Fuck'em.
I hit my limit at this Chinese Virus. People talking about things that could save lives was being censored to make sure Orange Man Bad.
I was a free speech absolutist. Everything is fair game. But, expect me to support someone's free speech for them to thank me by advocating my speech be taken? Fuck that.
Suppress people's free speech rights at the cost of actual lives? Yeah, fuck you and everyone who thinks like you, Youtube.
Someone really needs to update the golden rule: Treat others as they would treat you.
Carl Sagan used to talk about the Golden Rule, some more virtuous versions, and some less virtuous (but perhaps more practical) ones. There's the Brazen Rule: "Do unto others as they have done unto you", and the Iron Rule: "Do unto others as you like, before they do it unto you."
That sounds like a great way to turn people into passive slaves. "Just sit there and take it or god will wag his finger at you after you're dead and gone".
I never understood the "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" saying. It's pretending like there aren't selfish assholes (with both eyes) out there striking first and going for the eyes of others. Defending yourself and striking back is going to make everyone blind how exactly?
Because it perpetuates the cycle.
The only way for it to be possible to break the cycle of reciprocal violence is for people to abstain from participating in it, even at the cost of martyrdom.
"An eye for an eye implies you've severely failed in your efforts to de-eye your opponent. How can someone with no eyes best you and remove your eyes?"
An eye for an eye leaves a one-eyed man and a blind man. And in the world of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Christ explicitly rejected Exodus 21 in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5).
You're not a Christian if you cling to Exodus 21. Period.
To be fair this is what I’m telling my daughter. They teach the golden rule at school. I tell her if that kid is going to be mean to her she can be mean back. You start out nice but if it’s not reciprocated, screw em. I don’t want her getting abused her whole life because of this mindset.
Fuck their learning. I don't want them to learn, I want them to finally be punished for all the evil shit they've done. At this point, silencing liberals is a matter of self preservation.
The issue here is that they won't learn. They've already decided that liberty is a liability. They aren't wrong, though.
Liberty is a luxury of the unified.
I disagree. We're don't make society better by becoming like them in this regard. The focus should be on bettering society not fucking up "the censors."
Sooner we can stop doing this stupid, to me, "left" vs "right" ideology and move on to ...hell, at least more accurate terms that define what we're really believed... the more true progress society will make.
For instance, both "sides" want progress so the term progressive is a misnomer. Esso when they're taking us back into ethnic identity based tribalism.
I could do a while bit on this. How technically "right-wing" means hereditary rule, hierarchy, conformity, etc and very few people who get labeled that ate even ate off its meaning and less that agree with it. How the...boy, almost said "left" its insidious isn't it? How the...well, in this case it might make sense, the "left", as in the more humanist liberals from 50-100 years ago pushed the terms, like they do with most (as they realized that language can be a weapon and labeling your "Alt-Right" opponents as all Nazis and the rest of the 70% of that movement "Alt-Lite" of course turns your opponent, who just win an election, into something that few want to be associated with, etc etc.
But point being: we don't have to encourage censorship, just discourage hypocrisy and only one group being able to express themselves.
Basically, maybe you're right but if both parties are silenced, who does that leave in power? Just the neoliberal Uniparty. And thus the "both sides at once" meme...that I pushed hard leading up to Jan 6th... that went precisely nowhere. Lol