5 ms·

You are free to voice your opinion. Society is free to provide feedback to you on those opinions. If you have an opinion that a sufficient cohort of your peers

You are free to voice your opinion. Society is free to provide feedback to you on those opinions. If you have an opinion that a sufficient cohort of your peers in society feel is out of bounds for where society is headed or not compatible with the prevailing world view, society will provide corrective consequences/accountability. The system is working as it should.

ThrowawayR2 5y ago
> "If you have an opinion that a sufficient cohort of your peers in society feel is out of bounds for where society is headed or not compatible with the prevailing world view, society will provide corrective consequences/accountability." Society used to "provide corrective consequences/accountability" for atheism/agnosticism, advocating for socialism and workers' rights, advocating for the abolition of slavery and equal rights for PoC, advocating for LGBTQ rights, and so forth since all of those were violently opposed by the majority of society. By using the argument, the parent poster and anyone else who uses it implies that they would not only would have been okay with suppressing those rights but also would have enthusiastically supported "consequences" for those rights advocates if they'd been around in the era before those people became protected classes. If this doesn't make it obvious why that argument has zero validity, nothing will. What's more the "it's A-OK for society to beat you up for going against the majority" argument is an argument born of _conservatism_, since it literally argues for preserving the status quo. It's stunning to hear people supposedly on the left repeating it.
LegitShady 5y ago
I see you don’t have any understanding that in previous times, being gay had similar stigmas, which was obviously correct according to you - it was just society providing corrective consequences. It’s a bit of a trip to hear people who think they are progressive also think mobs harrassing people is ‘corrective consequences’. It’s just mob rule. The actual nazis attacking people in Germany in the 1930s would have been ‘corrective accountability’ according to your theory. We won’t ever come to an agreement. I think your point of view is repugnant.
- dabbledash 5y ago
  I was with you until the nazi thing. I doubt GP would condone actual violence.
  - LegitShady 5y ago
    The logic is the same - if the logic works to defend nazi actions maybe you need to inspect your logic more closely.
ponker 5y ago
Oh, like these corrective consequences/accountability? https://www.peoplesworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/pjimage-1-2.jpg https://www.peoplesworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/pjim... "The system is working as it should."
redis_mlc 5y ago
Spot the communist.
dabbledash 5y ago
I always wonder if people who make comments like this are old enough to remember when gay people were considered deviants by most of society.
badloginnew 5y ago
The Scarlet Letter worked well in other words. Maybe we should bring back public stonings, pillory, witch burning and other social credit feedback mechanism. An asshole free utopia awaits!
prepend 5y ago
> You are free to voice your opinion. I think GP’s comment is precisely that they aren’t free to voice opinion. The challenge is that .001% of society is expressing opinions on that. And that tiny number of people making noise is interpreted as society, since most of society doesn’t reeee on Twitter about opinions. For me, I’m not GP, it’s not worth the hassle and frustrating of navigating whatever is going on, so I don’t express opinions. I’m not free to express opinions.

ThrowawayR2 5y ago

> "If you have an opinion that a sufficient cohort of your peers in society feel is out of bounds for where society is headed or not compatible with the prevailing world view, society will provide corrective consequences/accountability." Society used to "provide corrective consequences/accountability" for atheism/agnosticism, advocating for socialism and workers' rights, advocating for the abolition of slavery and equal rights for PoC, advocating for LGBTQ rights, and so forth since all of those were violently opposed by the majority of society. By using the argument, the parent poster and anyone else who uses it implies that they would not only would have been okay with suppressing those rights but also would have enthusiastically supported "consequences" for those rights advocates if they'd been around in the era before those people became protected classes. If this doesn't make it obvious why that argument has zero validity, nothing will. What's more the "it's A-OK for society to beat you up for going against the majority" argument is an argument born of _conservatism_, since it literally argues for preserving the status quo. It's stunning to hear people supposedly on the left repeating it.

LegitShady 5y ago

I see you don’t have any understanding that in previous times, being gay had similar stigmas, which was obviously correct according to you - it was just society providing corrective consequences. It’s a bit of a trip to hear people who think they are progressive also think mobs harrassing people is ‘corrective consequences’. It’s just mob rule. The actual nazis attacking people in Germany in the 1930s would have been ‘corrective accountability’ according to your theory. We won’t ever come to an agreement. I think your point of view is repugnant.

dabbledash 5y ago
I was with you until the nazi thing. I doubt GP would condone actual violence.
- LegitShady 5y ago
  The logic is the same - if the logic works to defend nazi actions maybe you need to inspect your logic more closely.

ponker 5y ago

Oh, like these corrective consequences/accountability? https://www.peoplesworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/pjimage-1-2.jpg https://www.peoplesworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/pjim... "The system is working as it should."

redis_mlc 5y ago

Spot the communist.

dabbledash 5y ago

I always wonder if people who make comments like this are old enough to remember when gay people were considered deviants by most of society.

badloginnew 5y ago

The Scarlet Letter worked well in other words. Maybe we should bring back public stonings, pillory, witch burning and other social credit feedback mechanism. An asshole free utopia awaits!

prepend 5y ago

> You are free to voice your opinion. I think GP’s comment is precisely that they aren’t free to voice opinion. The challenge is that .001% of society is expressing opinions on that. And that tiny number of people making noise is interpreted as society, since most of society doesn’t reeee on Twitter about opinions. For me, I’m not GP, it’s not worth the hassle and frustrating of navigating whatever is going on, so I don’t express opinions. I’m not free to express opinions.