6 ms·

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility when your speech offends someone. Progressives aren’t stopping you from reading racist books to you

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility when your speech offends someone. Progressives aren’t stopping you from reading racist books to your children.... just don’t expect most people to want to sell them to you or pat you on the back for making the next generation toxic against fellow citizens.

DocTomoe 6y ago
I plan to make my children toxic towards people denying other peoples basic human rights, directly and indirectly (e.g. by limiting access {e.g. by banning or burning} to books).
- shlant 6y ago
  who's "basic human rights" are being denied here? Are you saying that the publisher of Dr.Seuss is committing human rights abuses by choosing not to publish some of the books THEY own the rights to? Also, maybe teaching your children to be toxic towards anything won't really improve the world they will have to live in?
  - DocTomoe 6y ago
    Surpressing information is wrong. The publisher not publishing is a minor case here, the Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces are the main enemy here. Also, being tolerant to intolerance breeds autocratic and non free societies. A lesson mankind seems to have to learn over and over and over again. My children will be taught that you do not suffer the Nazi, the Communist, the self-righteous conservative calling for a ban or the SJW.
    - shlant 6y ago
      > the Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces are the main enemy here. could you provide some examples of what you are referring to here?
      - kweinber 6y ago
        There aren't any. The legion of SJWs and progressive use of government bans are totally made-up things. Propaganda has been very strong the last few years, and people feel like defending racism is actually some sort of legitimate fight because they actually believe that things like Antifa, Social-Justice-Warriors, and government bans initiated by progressives are real organized things. They are invented ideas and tools used by propagandists to keep people divided and working against the interests of other Americans.
        tired-dev 6y ago
        It's a rhetorical approach that (Godwin's law be damned) dates back to Nazi Germany: "Cultural Bolshevism" (nowadays called "Cultural Marxism") was the purported threat of a vast communist conspiracy to destroy "the family", "cultural heritage", etc., of which all progressive groups are either co-conspirators or unwitting pawns. That way you can prevent your political base from scrutinizing or criticizing your untenable positions by painting the losing battles (such as "selling racist caricatures is a crucial tradition and doing it no longer is cowering before a leftist mob") as vital fronts in the "culture war". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism
        shlant 6y ago
        yea that was the reason why I asked for examples as I figured they were just parroting reactionary talking points without any evidence to back it up. I thought I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, but I'm still waiting on those examples...
      - DocTomoe 6y ago
        Have a starter from the ALA: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks
        shlant 6y ago
        that's not an example of "Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces". That's just vague gesturing at lists of controversial books all of which are readily available. Did you even go through this list? http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/decade2019 http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks... Most of them might be "banned" in a few select conservative/christian schools and that's it. Come up with actual examples of the things you are claiming or stop fear-mongering.
    - lgleason 6y ago
      This, 100% over. That is how I have lived my life and plan on passing that on to the next generation as well.
  - Chris2048 6y ago
    > THEY own the rights to these rights are supposed to protect compensation, not as a means of suppression or censorship. Why should society protect IP for this purpose, or compensate IP owners for which there are no damages?
    - shlant 6y ago
      are you saying that private entities don't get to choose what products to cease production of? Once you start producing a product, you are obligated to continue indefinitely?
      - Chris2048 6y ago
        No, I'm saying the opposite: the private owner should lose exclusive production rights if they cease production permanently; i.e others should be able to freely produce this book, now it is out of production, without fear of being sued over copyright.
CryptoPunk 6y ago
I agree with your point about freedom of speech. But I don't think any one is getting these books to teach their children to be racist, or that reading children this would have that effect. An image of African tribesmen is not even racist. It was historically accurate as of 1937. Any one reading kids this book would undoubtedly explain the book is 80 years old and a product of its time. EBay has a right to do any thing it wants, but I think it overreacted because of pressure from people who are uptight and looking for dragons to slay and people to push around.
undefined1 6y ago
limiting free speech, censoring people and media, is regressive and authoritarian to the core. don't kid yourself. > when your speech offends someone “It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Stephen Fry
grapecookie 6y ago
"making the next generation toxic against fellow citizens." - Dr Seuss probably
Chris2048 6y ago
> Progressives aren’t stopping you from reading racist books to your children.... just don’t expect most people to want to sell them to you The people that do want to sell them to you aren't allowed to do so.. meaning you are prevented in reading them.
loveistheanswer 6y ago
How can we humans progress morally if we systematically try to hide the history of our immorality from ourselves? This is precisely the same logic that led the Conquistadors to systematically destroy the history of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.

DocTomoe 6y ago

I plan to make my children toxic towards people denying other peoples basic human rights, directly and indirectly (e.g. by limiting access {e.g. by banning or burning} to books).

shlant 6y ago
who's "basic human rights" are being denied here? Are you saying that the publisher of Dr.Seuss is committing human rights abuses by choosing not to publish some of the books THEY own the rights to? Also, maybe teaching your children to be toxic towards anything won't really improve the world they will have to live in?
- DocTomoe 6y ago
  Surpressing information is wrong. The publisher not publishing is a minor case here, the Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces are the main enemy here. Also, being tolerant to intolerance breeds autocratic and non free societies. A lesson mankind seems to have to learn over and over and over again. My children will be taught that you do not suffer the Nazi, the Communist, the self-righteous conservative calling for a ban or the SJW.
  - shlant 6y ago
    > the Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces are the main enemy here. could you provide some examples of what you are referring to here?
    - kweinber 6y ago
      There aren't any. The legion of SJWs and progressive use of government bans are totally made-up things. Propaganda has been very strong the last few years, and people feel like defending racism is actually some sort of legitimate fight because they actually believe that things like Antifa, Social-Justice-Warriors, and government bans initiated by progressives are real organized things. They are invented ideas and tools used by propagandists to keep people divided and working against the interests of other Americans.
      - tired-dev 6y ago
        It's a rhetorical approach that (Godwin's law be damned) dates back to Nazi Germany: "Cultural Bolshevism" (nowadays called "Cultural Marxism") was the purported threat of a vast communist conspiracy to destroy "the family", "cultural heritage", etc., of which all progressive groups are either co-conspirators or unwitting pawns. That way you can prevent your political base from scrutinizing or criticizing your untenable positions by painting the losing battles (such as "selling racist caricatures is a crucial tradition and doing it no longer is cowering before a leftist mob") as vital fronts in the "culture war". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism
      - shlant 6y ago
        yea that was the reason why I asked for examples as I figured they were just parroting reactionary talking points without any evidence to back it up. I thought I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, but I'm still waiting on those examples...
    - DocTomoe 6y ago
      Have a starter from the ALA: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks
      - shlant 6y ago
        that's not an example of "Karens and SJWs who make existing work disappear by having it banned from libraries and/or public marketplaces". That's just vague gesturing at lists of controversial books all of which are readily available. Did you even go through this list? http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/decade2019 http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks... Most of them might be "banned" in a few select conservative/christian schools and that's it. Come up with actual examples of the things you are claiming or stop fear-mongering.
  - lgleason 6y ago
    This, 100% over. That is how I have lived my life and plan on passing that on to the next generation as well.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  > THEY own the rights to these rights are supposed to protect compensation, not as a means of suppression or censorship. Why should society protect IP for this purpose, or compensate IP owners for which there are no damages?
  - shlant 6y ago
    are you saying that private entities don't get to choose what products to cease production of? Once you start producing a product, you are obligated to continue indefinitely?
    - Chris2048 6y ago
      No, I'm saying the opposite: the private owner should lose exclusive production rights if they cease production permanently; i.e others should be able to freely produce this book, now it is out of production, without fear of being sued over copyright.

CryptoPunk 6y ago

I agree with your point about freedom of speech. But I don't think any one is getting these books to teach their children to be racist, or that reading children this would have that effect. An image of African tribesmen is not even racist. It was historically accurate as of 1937. Any one reading kids this book would undoubtedly explain the book is 80 years old and a product of its time. EBay has a right to do any thing it wants, but I think it overreacted because of pressure from people who are uptight and looking for dragons to slay and people to push around.

undefined1 6y ago

limiting free speech, censoring people and media, is regressive and authoritarian to the core. don't kid yourself. > when your speech offends someone “It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Stephen Fry

grapecookie 6y ago

"making the next generation toxic against fellow citizens." - Dr Seuss probably

Chris2048 6y ago

> Progressives aren’t stopping you from reading racist books to your children.... just don’t expect most people to want to sell them to you The people that do want to sell them to you aren't allowed to do so.. meaning you are prevented in reading them.

loveistheanswer 6y ago

How can we humans progress morally if we systematically try to hide the history of our immorality from ourselves? This is precisely the same logic that led the Conquistadors to systematically destroy the history of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.