6 ms·

You start your comment saying we should avoid making apocalyptic statements and end it by saying "the cycle is going to destroy our society". My conclusion is

You start your comment saying we should avoid making apocalyptic statements and end it by saying "the cycle is going to destroy our society". My conclusion is that you don't mind making apocalyptic statements about actions you think are dangerous to society, which sits uncomfortably with your asking other people not to.

roenxi 1y ago
I'd say the appropriate read there is to slip the word "unjustified" into a few key slots. The view is nearly impossible to avoid in context. How do you see society surviving if the prevailing view is that anyone with a different belief is trying to bring on the end times? To the point where assassinating political opponents is justified? It would bring on the end of a society. It might well happen in the US case, they've been heading in a pretty dangerous direction rhetorically. If we take the Soviet Union as a benchmark they probably have a long way to go but that sort of journey seems unnecessary and stupid.
- tshaddox 1y ago
  > I'd say the appropriate read there is to slip the word "unjustified" into a few key slots. "You shouldn't do anything unjustified" is an uncontroversial and useless prescription.
- the_gastropod 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - pixl97 1y ago
    Extremists don't like to address the paradox of tolerance.
    - mkfs 1y ago
      I'm confused; are you encouraging violence against intolerant leftists, especially Communist?
  - roenxi 1y ago
    Well, yes. We expect most religious people to put up with society at large damning souls to an eternity of torment and whatever. And people are forever pushing economic schemes that result in needless mass suffering. Not to mention that for reasons mysterious warmongers are usually treated with respect and tolerance in the public discourse. An idea being "harmful" isn't a very high bar, we have lots of those and by and large people are expected to put up with them. Society is so good at overlooking them it is easy to lose track of just how many terrible beliefs are on the move at any moment. Someone being a threat to democracy isn't actually all that close to the top of the list, although moving away from democracy is generally pretty stupid and a harbinger of really big problems.
    - the_gastropod 1y ago
      The original quote I was responding to here was > How do you see society surviving if the prevailing view is that anyone with a different belief is trying to bring on the end times? The point I was trying to make is: this is not what’s happening. It’s not “anyone with a different belief”. But some people, Kirk included, literally advocated for, e.g., stoning gay people. That’s not a reasonable position we can just compromise on. That’s reprehensible dehumanization.
      - roenxi 1y ago
        I'm not inclined to believe Kirk actually advocated that. Where and when did he say that? I want to check what the context was. A quick search only turned up people apologising for spreading false stories about him.
        the_gastropod 1y ago
        Here he is citing the bible quote about stoning gay people, referring to it as "God's perfect law". I guess some people are bending over backwards to interpret this in a non-horrific way. That's fine, I guess. We've got plenty of other reprehensible things he's said. https://xcancel.com/patriottakes/status/1800678317030564306 https://xcancel.com/patriottakes/status/1800678317030564306 Here he is using innuendo to suggest we should have "took care of" trans folks like we did in the 1950s and 1960s. https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/we-must-not-posthumously-sanitize https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/we-must-not-posthumously-... Here he is saying abortion is worse than the holocaust. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/global-trends/us-news-abortion-worse-than-holocaust-charlie-kirks-controversial-views-re-surface-daughter-rape-baby-delivered-after-trump-ally-assassinated/articleshow/123831808.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/glob... Here he is saying "Prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people -- that’s a fact" https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-goes-unhinged-racist-rant-prowling-blacks-go-around-fun-go-target-white https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-goes-... Of Jasmine Crockett, he said she was "attempt[ing] to eliminate the white population in this country" https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-accuses-rep-jasmine-crockett-being-part-attempt-eliminate-white https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-accus... Of Dreamers, he said "Those are the men that will go into your communities and break into your homes and rape your women, take your children" https://www.mediaite.com/media/radio/charlie-kirk-wants-to-start-a-border-militia-to-protect-white-demographics-in-america/ https://www.mediaite.com/media/radio/charlie-kirk-wants-to-s... Of the man who brutally assaulted Paul Pelosi with a hammer in 2022, he said: "If some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out" https://rumble.com/v1qs7n2-a-naked-smear-of-maga-don-buldoc-dan-cox-chadwick-moore-the-charlie-kirk-sh.html https://rumble.com/v1qs7n2-a-naked-smear-of-maga-don-buldoc-...
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Chris2048 1y ago
It's not clear that "existential" threat and "destruction of society" are the same. A society can be "destroyed" via a lapse in the social contract, turning it into a "society" or a different nature, or a non social population.
kryogen1c 1y ago
> My conclusion is that you don't mind making apocalyptic statements about actions you think are dangerous to society, which sits uncomfortably with your asking other people not to. This is a nonsense argument. It is possible that constantly making apocalyptic statements can result in an apocalypse, and saying that people should stop doing that is not contradictory. The words you use matter. If trump is an existential threat to democracy, he should be assassinated. If you're not advocating for murderous escalation, then stop using those words (for example).
- zamadatix 1y ago
  > If trump is an existential threat to democracy, he should be assassinated. Who/what is defining assassination as a reasonable response to that threat, who/what maintains the list of words which can replace "democracy" in that section, and what happens when someone disagrees with the maintainer of that list?
  - kryogen1c 1y ago
    Those are all great questions, and why the point under discussion is whether or not we should choose our words more carefully and stop making apocalyptic predictions.
    - zamadatix 1y ago
      I wholeheartedly disagree - we need to be less concerned with who might say something and more concerned with how we teach society to react to it. Whether or not someone is making apocalyptic predictions should not define our ability to hold back from assassinating.
      - wizzwizz4 1y ago
        How we say things is how we teach society to react to it. We're all teaching each other, every day.
        1y ago
gosub100 1y ago
I think they're politely asking for the far left to stop with the language inflation. Use words with appropriate and proportionate meanings. Do not try to gradually be more and more dramatic and impactful.

roenxi 1y ago

I'd say the appropriate read there is to slip the word "unjustified" into a few key slots. The view is nearly impossible to avoid in context. How do you see society surviving if the prevailing view is that anyone with a different belief is trying to bring on the end times? To the point where assassinating political opponents is justified? It would bring on the end of a society. It might well happen in the US case, they've been heading in a pretty dangerous direction rhetorically. If we take the Soviet Union as a benchmark they probably have a long way to go but that sort of journey seems unnecessary and stupid.

tshaddox 1y ago
> I'd say the appropriate read there is to slip the word "unjustified" into a few key slots. "You shouldn't do anything unjustified" is an uncontroversial and useless prescription.
the_gastropod 1y ago
[flagged]
- pixl97 1y ago
  Extremists don't like to address the paradox of tolerance.
  - mkfs 1y ago
    I'm confused; are you encouraging violence against intolerant leftists, especially Communist?
- roenxi 1y ago
  Well, yes. We expect most religious people to put up with society at large damning souls to an eternity of torment and whatever. And people are forever pushing economic schemes that result in needless mass suffering. Not to mention that for reasons mysterious warmongers are usually treated with respect and tolerance in the public discourse. An idea being "harmful" isn't a very high bar, we have lots of those and by and large people are expected to put up with them. Society is so good at overlooking them it is easy to lose track of just how many terrible beliefs are on the move at any moment. Someone being a threat to democracy isn't actually all that close to the top of the list, although moving away from democracy is generally pretty stupid and a harbinger of really big problems.
  - the_gastropod 1y ago
    The original quote I was responding to here was > How do you see society surviving if the prevailing view is that anyone with a different belief is trying to bring on the end times? The point I was trying to make is: this is not what’s happening. It’s not “anyone with a different belief”. But some people, Kirk included, literally advocated for, e.g., stoning gay people. That’s not a reasonable position we can just compromise on. That’s reprehensible dehumanization.
    - roenxi 1y ago
      I'm not inclined to believe Kirk actually advocated that. Where and when did he say that? I want to check what the context was. A quick search only turned up people apologising for spreading false stories about him.
      - the_gastropod 1y ago
        Here he is citing the bible quote about stoning gay people, referring to it as "God's perfect law". I guess some people are bending over backwards to interpret this in a non-horrific way. That's fine, I guess. We've got plenty of other reprehensible things he's said. https://xcancel.com/patriottakes/status/1800678317030564306 https://xcancel.com/patriottakes/status/1800678317030564306 Here he is using innuendo to suggest we should have "took care of" trans folks like we did in the 1950s and 1960s. https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/we-must-not-posthumously-sanitize https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/we-must-not-posthumously-... Here he is saying abortion is worse than the holocaust. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/global-trends/us-news-abortion-worse-than-holocaust-charlie-kirks-controversial-views-re-surface-daughter-rape-baby-delivered-after-trump-ally-assassinated/articleshow/123831808.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/glob... Here he is saying "Prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people -- that’s a fact" https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-goes-unhinged-racist-rant-prowling-blacks-go-around-fun-go-target-white https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-goes-... Of Jasmine Crockett, he said she was "attempt[ing] to eliminate the white population in this country" https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-accuses-rep-jasmine-crockett-being-part-attempt-eliminate-white https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-accus... Of Dreamers, he said "Those are the men that will go into your communities and break into your homes and rape your women, take your children" https://www.mediaite.com/media/radio/charlie-kirk-wants-to-start-a-border-militia-to-protect-white-demographics-in-america/ https://www.mediaite.com/media/radio/charlie-kirk-wants-to-s... Of the man who brutally assaulted Paul Pelosi with a hammer in 2022, he said: "If some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out" https://rumble.com/v1qs7n2-a-naked-smear-of-maga-don-buldoc-dan-cox-chadwick-moore-the-charlie-kirk-sh.html https://rumble.com/v1qs7n2-a-naked-smear-of-maga-don-buldoc-...

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Chris2048 1y ago

It's not clear that "existential" threat and "destruction of society" are the same. A society can be "destroyed" via a lapse in the social contract, turning it into a "society" or a different nature, or a non social population.

kryogen1c 1y ago

> My conclusion is that you don't mind making apocalyptic statements about actions you think are dangerous to society, which sits uncomfortably with your asking other people not to. This is a nonsense argument. It is possible that constantly making apocalyptic statements can result in an apocalypse, and saying that people should stop doing that is not contradictory. The words you use matter. If trump is an existential threat to democracy, he should be assassinated. If you're not advocating for murderous escalation, then stop using those words (for example).

zamadatix 1y ago
> If trump is an existential threat to democracy, he should be assassinated. Who/what is defining assassination as a reasonable response to that threat, who/what maintains the list of words which can replace "democracy" in that section, and what happens when someone disagrees with the maintainer of that list?
- kryogen1c 1y ago
  Those are all great questions, and why the point under discussion is whether or not we should choose our words more carefully and stop making apocalyptic predictions.
  - zamadatix 1y ago
    I wholeheartedly disagree - we need to be less concerned with who might say something and more concerned with how we teach society to react to it. Whether or not someone is making apocalyptic predictions should not define our ability to hold back from assassinating.
    - wizzwizz4 1y ago
      How we say things is how we teach society to react to it. We're all teaching each other, every day.
      - 1y ago

gosub100 1y ago

I think they're politely asking for the far left to stop with the language inflation. Use words with appropriate and proportionate meanings. Do not try to gradually be more and more dramatic and impactful.