5 ms·

You can't have an intelligent and non-emotional argument about certain topics in full (e.g. racism, sexuality, politics, immigration, religion), nor can you do

by zo1 6y ago

You can't have an intelligent and non-emotional argument about certain topics in full (e.g. racism, sexuality, politics, immigration, religion), nor can you do so without certain sides invoking some "hate" aura because like it or not, there is a prevailing (and left-leaning) definition that is semi-agreed and pushed by official institutions, and you can't go against it without your argument being labelled "hate". And no wonder the right feels persecuted, because their beliefs are not necessarily hateful yet they are labelled as such by default. It's like drawing the line somewhere arbitrary and then asking the side whose beliefs are on the other side "why can't you discuss this without resorting to hate speech", and "stop complaining because your side is hateful" and "it's okay for companies to refuse you service because your ideas are hate speech and X-ist". Few examples of acceptable "hate-speech" that falls within that acceptable line: Anti-white Racism. ACAB. Punch-A-Nazi.

rayiner 6y ago
And increasingly more and more things are being brought under that umbrella. The right’s doctrine of Constitutional interpretation? According to a sitting US Senator, “racist,” “misogynistic,” and “homophobic.” https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/1320808025393868800?s=20 https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/1320808025393868800?s=2... Immigration is a good example. Cultural relativism has become broadly accepted among the progressive left. As a result, they increasingly can only see immigration as an economic issue. Preserving the country’s existing culture to them isn’t a valid reason, so they deem it “racist.” This is internally consistent to them. If culture doesn’t make a difference, the only reason not to have mass immigration is potential economic downsides, or limited infrastructure. Assimilation and the “Melting Pot” is increasingly coming under attack for the same reason. This is totally incomprehensible to conservatives, who reject cultural relativism. They believe the success of a society is based on deep-seated cultural features and social reinforcement thereof. (I once had a Japanese person go through hundreds of years of Japanese history to explain to me why the country has less problems with corruption than many other Asian countries.) Within that framework, “we don’t want our community to change” is a completely valid position. At the very least, assimilation is indispensable.

by zo1 6y ago

rayiner 6y ago

And increasingly more and more things are being brought under that umbrella. The right’s doctrine of Constitutional interpretation? According to a sitting US Senator, “racist,” “misogynistic,” and “homophobic.” https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/1320808025393868800?s=20 https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/1320808025393868800?s=2... Immigration is a good example. Cultural relativism has become broadly accepted among the progressive left. As a result, they increasingly can only see immigration as an economic issue. Preserving the country’s existing culture to them isn’t a valid reason, so they deem it “racist.” This is internally consistent to them. If culture doesn’t make a difference, the only reason not to have mass immigration is potential economic downsides, or limited infrastructure. Assimilation and the “Melting Pot” is increasingly coming under attack for the same reason. This is totally incomprehensible to conservatives, who reject cultural relativism. They believe the success of a society is based on deep-seated cultural features and social reinforcement thereof. (I once had a Japanese person go through hundreds of years of Japanese history to explain to me why the country has less problems with corruption than many other Asian countries.) Within that framework, “we don’t want our community to change” is a completely valid position. At the very least, assimilation is indispensable.