2 ms·

Centrism has always meant too stupid or milquetoast to stake out a proper position. Damned few on the left want to arrest people for giving offense whereas the

Centrism has always meant too stupid or milquetoast to stake out a proper position. Damned few on the left want to arrest people for giving offense whereas the overwhelming majority on the right support an actual fascist regime on this side of the pond. You know this and you still made this comment.

zozbot234 2y ago
> Damned few on the left want to arrest people for giving offense Of course they do. Plenty of people on the left say that the very notion of free speech is "problematic" and must be criticized. Which directly implies that they find it less problematic to criminalize speech, as the UK does.
- Yoric 2y ago
  Do you have any example?
  - muro 2y ago
    https://www.srf.ch/kultur/musik/kontroverse-schweizer-saengerin-darum-hat-das-m4music-festival-bernarda-brunovic-ausgeladen https://www.srf.ch/kultur/musik/kontroverse-schweizer-saenge...
    - Yoric 2y ago
      If I read this correctly (my Swiss German is a bit rusty), there is an unnamed group (presumably somewhere on the left) who called for causing disturbances during a concert of a singer, and the organizers decided to cancel the concert? Is that correct? Because if I recall your (now flagged) message correctly, you were claiming that the left was in favor of putting people in jail for their opinions. While "we're going to make a demonstration to show how much we disagree with someone" can definitely be an annoyance, it's really, really, really far from your initial claim. At this point, I remain unconvinced.
- fpoling 2y ago
  Karl Popper pointed out that the free speech must defend itself. Otherwise a party that wants to put an end to it will use it for own propaganda and eventually get into power destroying free speech. Of cause it is hard to get the balance right and what UK is doing does not look right. But UK does have the problem of ultra-right movements that want to establish a fascist regime.
  - zozbot234 2y ago
    > Karl Popper pointed out that the free speech must defend itself. Yes, that's in fact a very old idea - that the "soap box" must defend itself with the "ballot box", and the ballot box with the "cartridge box". But what's happening now is a lot worse: free speech is being destroyed for the sake of not "causing offense". Which amounts to giving express legitimacy to intolerance, and saying that it must always win over tolerance.
  - card_zero 2y ago
    Did he mention speech? https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#The_Open_Society_and_Its_Enemies_(1945) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#The_Open_Society_a... I think you refer to the quotes about the paradoxes of freedom and tolerance.
    - fpoling 2y ago
      Thanks, I was mistaken. However any reasonable tolerance includes broad free speech so Popper was more generic.
Y_Y 2y ago
> Centrism has always meant too stupid or milquetoast to stake out a proper position. Even when people hold views different to mine, I am careful not to ascribe this to some fundamental flaw in their character. There are lots of ways to be wrong about something that are incidental and understandable, and these apply to me as well as others. I don't think this practice (c.f. "fundamental attribution error") is a route to truth or productive discourse.
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  Most issues are multidimensional but lets simplify. The most extreme pro gun rights position would see militias with machine guns, felons with guns, teachers and a small army of security guards packing heat to fight school shooters. The most extreme anti gun rights position would see few private citizens without a specific need armed. A centrist position has typically been to do almost nothing to allow some states to do minor reforms so long as gun rights aren't impacted. The fact that the developed world virtually all exists towards very highly centrally regulated to nonexistant gun ownership and isn't constantly burying children suggests that this is the right strategy and that deviation is defect worse many strategies for handling many issues require commitment and half measures do nothing. Take a wife beater who hasn't caught a felony yet but whose history of violent behavior ought to disqualify him. Banning his gun ownership due to misdemeanor and denying him or seizing his registered guns might statistically save his wife but a waiting period for a new handgun won't.

zozbot234 2y ago

> Damned few on the left want to arrest people for giving offense Of course they do. Plenty of people on the left say that the very notion of free speech is "problematic" and must be criticized. Which directly implies that they find it less problematic to criminalize speech, as the UK does.

Yoric 2y ago
Do you have any example?
- muro 2y ago
  https://www.srf.ch/kultur/musik/kontroverse-schweizer-saengerin-darum-hat-das-m4music-festival-bernarda-brunovic-ausgeladen https://www.srf.ch/kultur/musik/kontroverse-schweizer-saenge...
  - Yoric 2y ago
    If I read this correctly (my Swiss German is a bit rusty), there is an unnamed group (presumably somewhere on the left) who called for causing disturbances during a concert of a singer, and the organizers decided to cancel the concert? Is that correct? Because if I recall your (now flagged) message correctly, you were claiming that the left was in favor of putting people in jail for their opinions. While "we're going to make a demonstration to show how much we disagree with someone" can definitely be an annoyance, it's really, really, really far from your initial claim. At this point, I remain unconvinced.
fpoling 2y ago
Karl Popper pointed out that the free speech must defend itself. Otherwise a party that wants to put an end to it will use it for own propaganda and eventually get into power destroying free speech. Of cause it is hard to get the balance right and what UK is doing does not look right. But UK does have the problem of ultra-right movements that want to establish a fascist regime.
- zozbot234 2y ago
  > Karl Popper pointed out that the free speech must defend itself. Yes, that's in fact a very old idea - that the "soap box" must defend itself with the "ballot box", and the ballot box with the "cartridge box". But what's happening now is a lot worse: free speech is being destroyed for the sake of not "causing offense". Which amounts to giving express legitimacy to intolerance, and saying that it must always win over tolerance.
- card_zero 2y ago
  Did he mention speech? https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#The_Open_Society_and_Its_Enemies_(1945) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#The_Open_Society_a... I think you refer to the quotes about the paradoxes of freedom and tolerance.
  - fpoling 2y ago
    Thanks, I was mistaken. However any reasonable tolerance includes broad free speech so Popper was more generic.

Y_Y 2y ago

> Centrism has always meant too stupid or milquetoast to stake out a proper position. Even when people hold views different to mine, I am careful not to ascribe this to some fundamental flaw in their character. There are lots of ways to be wrong about something that are incidental and understandable, and these apply to me as well as others. I don't think this practice (c.f. "fundamental attribution error") is a route to truth or productive discourse.

michaelmrose 2y ago
Most issues are multidimensional but lets simplify. The most extreme pro gun rights position would see militias with machine guns, felons with guns, teachers and a small army of security guards packing heat to fight school shooters. The most extreme anti gun rights position would see few private citizens without a specific need armed. A centrist position has typically been to do almost nothing to allow some states to do minor reforms so long as gun rights aren't impacted. The fact that the developed world virtually all exists towards very highly centrally regulated to nonexistant gun ownership and isn't constantly burying children suggests that this is the right strategy and that deviation is defect worse many strategies for handling many issues require commitment and half measures do nothing. Take a wife beater who hasn't caught a felony yet but whose history of violent behavior ought to disqualify him. Banning his gun ownership due to misdemeanor and denying him or seizing his registered guns might statistically save his wife but a waiting period for a new handgun won't.