10 ms·

> That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both fe

> That said, there's a huge gap between a religion a person is imparted with as a child, and philosophy they chose as an adult and have jumped into with both feet. Searching out which people have chosen a philosophy as an adult is how witch hunts start and are justified. I've heard complaints about McCarthyism and the Red Scare over the years, and I thought the moral was "witch hunts are bad." However, it looks clear to me that other people think the main problem was that McCarthy picked the wrong targets. If he hadn't chased leftist beliefs, then perhaps he never would have been vilified.

Pxtl 10y ago
Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". Seriously, would you make excuses like this for a pro-ISIS muslim? A white nationalist? A violent anarchist? An antisemitic holocaust denier? Believing that one person is less human than the other by the attributes of their birth is not a philosophical discussion like capitalism vs communism. If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them.
- ploxiln 10y ago
  That's the funny thing - leftist beliefs are in fact "half the population is my lesser". The half that are not leftist are "bad hateful people", and you hate them and do not tolerate them. I'm no republican, but I end up being more annoyed by liberals for such blatant doublethink, for being unable to recognize their own actions.
  - Pxtl 10y ago
    > The half that are not leftist are "bad hateful people", and you hate them and do not tolerate them. You're arguing with a strawman. There's an ocean of space between "leftist" and "bigoted" for normal centre and right-wing people who aren't bigots. I'll agree that the social justice community has made a bad habit of throwing around "racist" and "sexist" far too freely, especially in the wake of Trump's election. But this isn't like that. This is a guy who celebrates sexism. Who has made sexism a cornerstone of his ideology. It is not hypocritical to be intolerant of intolerance, anymore than it is hypocritical to use violence to stop violence (since that is the entire mechanism of law enforcement).
  - Frondo 10y ago
    I've never seen any leftist claim that any group is inferior by birth; though it is, of course, easy to find leftists looking down on people for the ideas they hold and politics they practice. But having bad ideas doesn't seem to translate to "is my lesser" or is less human than me. To put it another way, the leftists will acknowledge that anyone can grow out of stupid ideas (and indeed, there are hopeful stories of bigots changing their tune), while the things the right gets down on people for (being gay, whatever) are things built into the person. So, I think this is an inaccurate characterization of the left. You're free to be annoyed by whatever annoys you, of course, but this one might merit rethinking.
    - yakshaving_jgt 10y ago
      > I've never seen any leftist claim that any group is inferior by birth Did you forget radical feminism?
  - exclusiv 10y ago
    Leftists do regularly paint those with different beliefs as evil just because they have a different point of view. They also have a streak of disdain toward minorities where they start with an assumption that they can't do certain things and only the lefties can save them with overreaching policies. So while I agree with you - your second statement "annoyed by liberals" should probably be changed to "annoyed by leftists". Liberals and leftists couldn't be more different but are often used interchangeably. Leftists will do what we are talking about. Liberals don't.
    - ploxiln 10y ago
      I didn't even notice that I used a different term - thanks for pointing that out. And the terms are probably defined differently by significant numbers of people (compare to "hacker"). So I'll go ahead and agree that there are more than a few liberals out there who seem reasonable to me, and I might even consider myself among them :)
- enord 10y ago
  Yes, the beliefs he entertain in his mind are doing terrible damage to the moral fiber of our civilization as we speak. Burn him at the stake, I say! >Seriously, would you make excuses like this for a pro-ISIS muslim? A white nationalist? A violent anarchist? An antisemitic holocaust denier? I can only speak for myself but I would tolerate it vehemently. I have more respect for politeness through gritted teeth than indignation, exclusion and marginalization because the former implies real effort and a conscious fight against your innate prejudice. Of course, no prejudice is best but show me the man who doth not judgeth and i will show you a liar.
- yakshaving_jgt 10y ago
  > Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". Yes they are. Opposing views (and the people who hold them) are seen as morally inferior. Furthermore, people who hold leftist beliefs defend other people who hold views such as “women are inferior”, or “homosexuality should be punishable by death”, etc. And I say this is a liberal, left-leaning, pro-multiculturalism individual. My point is perhaps not entirely relevant to this Drupal guy though.
- dsr_ 10y ago
  AFAIK, a whole bunch of people here are missing the point: the Gorean stuff is primarily a consensual sexual fantasy, not a 24/7 philosophy. It doesn't say "this is the right way to live life for everyone", it says "we like this system for our personal lives and weekends and vacations". ISIS? Nazis? They want to destroy the world and make it over in their own image, not be left alone in quiet enjoyment of their kinks. Different things entirely.
  - Pxtl 10y ago
    ... ouch. That really would've been nice to see in the letter. Having a pervy philosophy during kinky sex with consenting adults is a very different thing from believing women are inherently inferior.
    - Bartweiss 10y ago
      As I understood it, the driving evidence in this case (what's been publicized, at least) was roleplay on a private forum specifically for that purpose. Which wasn't clarified in the letter, but is a significant part of why people across the political spectrum are so upset about this one - it treats statements made in a fictional context as core beliefs. (All made more complicated by the fact that Goreanism itself seems to operate on a bizarre multiple-levels-of-fiction basis, but still.)
    - striking 10y ago
      My God. Did you honestly think it was the latter? Without even considering the less malicious of the two first?
      - Pxtl 10y ago
        "Brilliant Geek posts mysogyny on his spare time" happens enough that I took it at face value. I mean, after Scott Adams and Dave Sim, it wouldn't be shocking to learn that a geek I respected had views that disgusted me.
        10y ago
- maxlybbert 10y ago
  > If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. Thank you for confirming my point: there are people who believe McCarthy was wrong only because he picked the wrong targets. If he had picked other targets, the resulting witch hunts would have been acceptable.
  - Pxtl 10y ago
    > there are people who believe McCarthy was wrong only because he picked the wrong targets. "Actually doing damage" is a fairly good discriminator, imho.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - maxlybbert 10y ago
      C.S. Lewis: "One man said to me, 'Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?' But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did -- if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather -- surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did?"
      - btschaegg 10y ago
        Very interesting quote. That statement underlines an important point: Witch hunts are commited by people who are convinced that their reaction is justified. Then, it was because that evil witch had cursed your cousin, now it is perhaps because someone made a joke you didn't get[1]. And obviously, no single person holding the digital pitchforks would ever think of themselves doing the same thing as a superstitious peasant a couple hundred years ago. Is there something productive anyone could do in this regard? I would guess in the most cases, the trenches are almost instantly dug way too deep for a sensible discussion... [1]: To resort to an example Jon Ronson talked about in various talks. Well worth a Google query.
- jdietrich 10y ago
  >If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. That's the business of the criminal justice system. If someone is committing criminal acts, then they need to be caught and prosecuted. If they merely hold objectionable views, then it's not my job to try them in the court of public opinion. If I'm free to persecute people whose beliefs I disagree with, then what right have I to complain if someone starts persecuting me for my beliefs? Witch-hunting and thought-policing is a very slippery slope.
- smsm42 10y ago
  > Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". One could be very easily misled into thinking so with comments like "basket of deplorables". And it's not the only or the worst that leftists said about their opponents. One could argue about if it's exactly "half of the population" or merely 37%, but the idea of un-acceptance and plain old hate is definitely there. And occasionally spills out into violence, as we have seen lately. > Believing that one person is less human than the other by the attributes of their birth is not a philosophical discussion like capitalism vs communism. Communists believe bourgeoise are less human, at least if you look how they treated them whereever they got to win. Including kids, of course. In fact, in the USSR having ancestors of a wrong class (not "worker class") was a permanent stain on one's CV for a quite long time. Not sure about other communist/socialist countries but don't think they were more moderate. > If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. Except beliefs don't do damage. Actions do. And in this case literally nobody was able to name any harmful action that ever happened. Unless "I got my feelings hurt knowing you think wrongthoughts" is counted as harm, which it is not.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > One could be very easily misled into thinking so with comments like "basket of deplorables". Even if you could, that was a comment from a center-right neoliberal about the supporters of a far right authoritarian, and didn't involve leftists in any capacity. > Communists believe bourgeoise are less human, at least if you look how they treated them whereever they got to win. The bourgeoisie are a narrow elite, particularly so (compared to, e.g., the developed West and economies which met the criteria for moving on from capitalism to socialism in the Marxist model of Communism) in places where Leninist vanguardism established regimes, not half of the population. And, in any case, Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of leftism, in much the same way Dominionism isn't representative of Christianity. (Or, for that matter, the same way that Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of atheism.)
    - smsm42 10y ago
      > didn't involve leftists in any capacity. Ah, I know, no true Scottsman! > not half of the population. Well, I don't know if any regime managed to kill literally half of the affected population, but certainly Stalin and Pol Pot could be seen as a viable contenders. Not forgetting the wonders of Cultural Revolution of course. If some movement hold the championship in dehumanising the opponents, it's certainly ones that created Gulag, killing fields, Great Leap Forward, and other similar wonders. All no true Scottsmen of course. And we should not forget one National Socialist Worker Party, which despite the name also definitely has nothing to do with socialism and such. > And, in any case, Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of leftism But of course. How did I know? > the same way that Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of atheism. Atheist ideas were not central to the bolsheviks' worldview - while totalitarian ideology they followed left no place for Christianity or any other old religion, they were perfectly fine creating new one, with their own saints, holidays, prayers, rituals and churches. They were against God only because The Party leaves no space for God on the top in their ideology. But leftist socialist ideology was the backbone of their worldview. Of course, now, that disastrous results of this ideology is in full view, modern leftists show wonders of creativity to prove that nobody who ever tried to build a society based on leftist principles was actually adherent of these principles. These effort are nothing but laughable, but some people do it again and again.

Pxtl 10y ago

Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". Seriously, would you make excuses like this for a pro-ISIS muslim? A white nationalist? A violent anarchist? An antisemitic holocaust denier? Believing that one person is less human than the other by the attributes of their birth is not a philosophical discussion like capitalism vs communism. If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them.

ploxiln 10y ago
That's the funny thing - leftist beliefs are in fact "half the population is my lesser". The half that are not leftist are "bad hateful people", and you hate them and do not tolerate them. I'm no republican, but I end up being more annoyed by liberals for such blatant doublethink, for being unable to recognize their own actions.
- Pxtl 10y ago
  > The half that are not leftist are "bad hateful people", and you hate them and do not tolerate them. You're arguing with a strawman. There's an ocean of space between "leftist" and "bigoted" for normal centre and right-wing people who aren't bigots. I'll agree that the social justice community has made a bad habit of throwing around "racist" and "sexist" far too freely, especially in the wake of Trump's election. But this isn't like that. This is a guy who celebrates sexism. Who has made sexism a cornerstone of his ideology. It is not hypocritical to be intolerant of intolerance, anymore than it is hypocritical to use violence to stop violence (since that is the entire mechanism of law enforcement).
- Frondo 10y ago
  I've never seen any leftist claim that any group is inferior by birth; though it is, of course, easy to find leftists looking down on people for the ideas they hold and politics they practice. But having bad ideas doesn't seem to translate to "is my lesser" or is less human than me. To put it another way, the leftists will acknowledge that anyone can grow out of stupid ideas (and indeed, there are hopeful stories of bigots changing their tune), while the things the right gets down on people for (being gay, whatever) are things built into the person. So, I think this is an inaccurate characterization of the left. You're free to be annoyed by whatever annoys you, of course, but this one might merit rethinking.
  - yakshaving_jgt 10y ago
    > I've never seen any leftist claim that any group is inferior by birth Did you forget radical feminism?
- exclusiv 10y ago
  Leftists do regularly paint those with different beliefs as evil just because they have a different point of view. They also have a streak of disdain toward minorities where they start with an assumption that they can't do certain things and only the lefties can save them with overreaching policies. So while I agree with you - your second statement "annoyed by liberals" should probably be changed to "annoyed by leftists". Liberals and leftists couldn't be more different but are often used interchangeably. Leftists will do what we are talking about. Liberals don't.
  - ploxiln 10y ago
    I didn't even notice that I used a different term - thanks for pointing that out. And the terms are probably defined differently by significant numbers of people (compare to "hacker"). So I'll go ahead and agree that there are more than a few liberals out there who seem reasonable to me, and I might even consider myself among them :)
enord 10y ago
Yes, the beliefs he entertain in his mind are doing terrible damage to the moral fiber of our civilization as we speak. Burn him at the stake, I say! >Seriously, would you make excuses like this for a pro-ISIS muslim? A white nationalist? A violent anarchist? An antisemitic holocaust denier? I can only speak for myself but I would tolerate it vehemently. I have more respect for politeness through gritted teeth than indignation, exclusion and marginalization because the former implies real effort and a conscious fight against your innate prejudice. Of course, no prejudice is best but show me the man who doth not judgeth and i will show you a liar.
yakshaving_jgt 10y ago
> Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". Yes they are. Opposing views (and the people who hold them) are seen as morally inferior. Furthermore, people who hold leftist beliefs defend other people who hold views such as “women are inferior”, or “homosexuality should be punishable by death”, etc. And I say this is a liberal, left-leaning, pro-multiculturalism individual. My point is perhaps not entirely relevant to this Drupal guy though.
dsr_ 10y ago
AFAIK, a whole bunch of people here are missing the point: the Gorean stuff is primarily a consensual sexual fantasy, not a 24/7 philosophy. It doesn't say "this is the right way to live life for everyone", it says "we like this system for our personal lives and weekends and vacations". ISIS? Nazis? They want to destroy the world and make it over in their own image, not be left alone in quiet enjoyment of their kinks. Different things entirely.
- Pxtl 10y ago
  ... ouch. That really would've been nice to see in the letter. Having a pervy philosophy during kinky sex with consenting adults is a very different thing from believing women are inherently inferior.
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    As I understood it, the driving evidence in this case (what's been publicized, at least) was roleplay on a private forum specifically for that purpose. Which wasn't clarified in the letter, but is a significant part of why people across the political spectrum are so upset about this one - it treats statements made in a fictional context as core beliefs. (All made more complicated by the fact that Goreanism itself seems to operate on a bizarre multiple-levels-of-fiction basis, but still.)
  - striking 10y ago
    My God. Did you honestly think it was the latter? Without even considering the less malicious of the two first?
    - Pxtl 10y ago
      "Brilliant Geek posts mysogyny on his spare time" happens enough that I took it at face value. I mean, after Scott Adams and Dave Sim, it wouldn't be shocking to learn that a geek I respected had views that disgusted me.
      - 10y ago
maxlybbert 10y ago
> If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. Thank you for confirming my point: there are people who believe McCarthy was wrong only because he picked the wrong targets. If he had picked other targets, the resulting witch hunts would have been acceptable.
- Pxtl 10y ago
  > there are people who believe McCarthy was wrong only because he picked the wrong targets. "Actually doing damage" is a fairly good discriminator, imho.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - maxlybbert 10y ago
    C.S. Lewis: "One man said to me, 'Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?' But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did -- if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather -- surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did?"
    - btschaegg 10y ago
      Very interesting quote. That statement underlines an important point: Witch hunts are commited by people who are convinced that their reaction is justified. Then, it was because that evil witch had cursed your cousin, now it is perhaps because someone made a joke you didn't get[1]. And obviously, no single person holding the digital pitchforks would ever think of themselves doing the same thing as a superstitious peasant a couple hundred years ago. Is there something productive anyone could do in this regard? I would guess in the most cases, the trenches are almost instantly dug way too deep for a sensible discussion... [1]: To resort to an example Jon Ronson talked about in various talks. Well worth a Google query.
jdietrich 10y ago
>If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. That's the business of the criminal justice system. If someone is committing criminal acts, then they need to be caught and prosecuted. If they merely hold objectionable views, then it's not my job to try them in the court of public opinion. If I'm free to persecute people whose beliefs I disagree with, then what right have I to complain if someone starts persecuting me for my beliefs? Witch-hunting and thought-policing is a very slippery slope.
smsm42 10y ago
> Leftist beliefs aren't "half the population is my lesser". One could be very easily misled into thinking so with comments like "basket of deplorables". And it's not the only or the worst that leftists said about their opponents. One could argue about if it's exactly "half of the population" or merely 37%, but the idea of un-acceptance and plain old hate is definitely there. And occasionally spills out into violence, as we have seen lately. > Believing that one person is less human than the other by the attributes of their birth is not a philosophical discussion like capitalism vs communism. Communists believe bourgeoise are less human, at least if you look how they treated them whereever they got to win. Including kids, of course. In fact, in the USSR having ancestors of a wrong class (not "worker class") was a permanent stain on one's CV for a quite long time. Not sure about other communist/socialist countries but don't think they were more moderate. > If witches are actually doing damage, then by all means hunt them. Except beliefs don't do damage. Actions do. And in this case literally nobody was able to name any harmful action that ever happened. Unless "I got my feelings hurt knowing you think wrongthoughts" is counted as harm, which it is not.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > One could be very easily misled into thinking so with comments like "basket of deplorables". Even if you could, that was a comment from a center-right neoliberal about the supporters of a far right authoritarian, and didn't involve leftists in any capacity. > Communists believe bourgeoise are less human, at least if you look how they treated them whereever they got to win. The bourgeoisie are a narrow elite, particularly so (compared to, e.g., the developed West and economies which met the criteria for moving on from capitalism to socialism in the Marxist model of Communism) in places where Leninist vanguardism established regimes, not half of the population. And, in any case, Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of leftism, in much the same way Dominionism isn't representative of Christianity. (Or, for that matter, the same way that Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of atheism.)
  - smsm42 10y ago
    > didn't involve leftists in any capacity. Ah, I know, no true Scottsman! > not half of the population. Well, I don't know if any regime managed to kill literally half of the affected population, but certainly Stalin and Pol Pot could be seen as a viable contenders. Not forgetting the wonders of Cultural Revolution of course. If some movement hold the championship in dehumanising the opponents, it's certainly ones that created Gulag, killing fields, Great Leap Forward, and other similar wonders. All no true Scottsmen of course. And we should not forget one National Socialist Worker Party, which despite the name also definitely has nothing to do with socialism and such. > And, in any case, Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of leftism But of course. How did I know? > the same way that Leninist vanguardism isn't representative of atheism. Atheist ideas were not central to the bolsheviks' worldview - while totalitarian ideology they followed left no place for Christianity or any other old religion, they were perfectly fine creating new one, with their own saints, holidays, prayers, rituals and churches. They were against God only because The Party leaves no space for God on the top in their ideology. But leftist socialist ideology was the backbone of their worldview. Of course, now, that disastrous results of this ideology is in full view, modern leftists show wonders of creativity to prove that nobody who ever tried to build a society based on leftist principles was actually adherent of these principles. These effort are nothing but laughable, but some people do it again and again.