6 ms·

> Whatever happened to "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."? Marxism happened. Limiting speech has al

> Whatever happened to "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."? Marxism happened. Limiting speech has always been a tactic employed by the political left. Words like "racist", "sexist" and "homophobe" were designed to shut down free speech. It's extremely effective at silencing any opposition.

overgard 11y ago
You're getting unfairly downvoted, but you're right: whether you agree with their ideas or not, the main tactic of the left is to police what topics are "appropriate" and marginalize those who are "inappropriate" with a label. I'm mostly apolitical so I'm not particularly outraged by this, but I wish they'd just own what they do. If they really think their ideas stand up, they should be welcoming opposition rather than trying to silence it.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  Just curious why you say that is the "main tactic of the left"?
- wavefunction 11y ago
  Unfairly? I think you're both ignoring the same behavior in other political factions. I certainly see certain groups trying to decide who can make decisions about a woman's body, who people can marry or adopt children, and other individual freedoms.
nyolfen 11y ago
marxism has very little to do with racism, sexism or homophobia
- overgard 11y ago
  Sure, but those labels are very useful for throwing your opponents under the bus.
- Grue3 11y ago
  It correlates pretty strongly. See, USSR, Maoist China, and so on.
  - hga 11y ago
    As some "for instances", in the Soviet Union, Jews were labeled as such on their mandatory internal passports, not Russians or whatever, and their access to higher education was limited, and I'd hope I'd not need to point out how the Han Chinese who run the PRC treat their ethnic neighbors like the Tibetans and Uyghurs.
    - topynate 11y ago
      Certainly true as a matter of those states' fundamental hypocrisy, but I believe PopeOfNope was referring to the Left's deployment of those terms as offensive weapons - which also happened. For example, the USSR was very big on paying lip-service to anti-colonialism as a form of soft power over the non-aligned block[1]. This did not seem to noticeably affect her behaviour towards Afghanistan in the Soviet-Afghan War[2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War
al3x 11y ago
The political left in America were made enemies of the state during the era of McCarthyism. People's careers and personal lives were ruined during that Red Scare. That is "silencing". That is "limiting speech". Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? If someone is called out for racism and then voluntarily chooses to exit public life or withdraw further commentary, that's their own cowardly choice. Being criticized does not "silence" anyone. The right in America has a political and media apparatus that far outstrips that of the left in funding. Worry not: hate is no danger of being silenced in this country. Far-right demagogues continue to fill newspapers, magazines, think tank briefing, the Internet, and airwaves with their ideas despite decades of criticism from the left.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  "Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"?" Well, you just personally silenced Yarvin, so there's one.
- paxdickinson 11y ago
  >Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? Hi, nice to meetcha.
- devalier 11y ago
  Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? Here is a very long list: https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-badgered-pressured-and-purged/ https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-bad... Congratulations on getting the last and final scalp. The right in America has a political and media apparatus that far outstrips that of the left in funding. The left has 99% of the university system including the entire Ivy league, which in total receives hundreds of billions of dollars in funding. The left also has most major media ranging from PBS and the NYTimes to CNN (although some are only partially under left-wing control, and will play cheerleader for war due to their own profit, not out of any right-wing ideology). The only way you can define the "right" as being stronger is if you find the left-most country out there as being the true way, and anything less than that as being rightist. A better way to look at strength is to look at who has been winning the battles. If you look at the past 50 years, the left has won most of them. If you look at the past 100 years, overall, the nation has moved way left on virtually every single issue. There has been some back-and-forth on individual issues, but overall, the direction is very clear. Worry not: hate is no danger of being silenced in this country. I don't actually have a problem with silencing hateful people. But Curtis was never hateful to minorities. He is a good person trying to make an honest critique based on the evidence as he saw it. When you purge people like that, you only make your own movement and group stupider. And that is a problem, because if you cannot investigate the true causes of a social ill without forcing people to self-censor and avoid crime-think, then you can never fix the problems.

overgard 11y ago

You're getting unfairly downvoted, but you're right: whether you agree with their ideas or not, the main tactic of the left is to police what topics are "appropriate" and marginalize those who are "inappropriate" with a label. I'm mostly apolitical so I'm not particularly outraged by this, but I wish they'd just own what they do. If they really think their ideas stand up, they should be welcoming opposition rather than trying to silence it.

jsprogrammer 11y ago
Just curious why you say that is the "main tactic of the left"?
wavefunction 11y ago
Unfairly? I think you're both ignoring the same behavior in other political factions. I certainly see certain groups trying to decide who can make decisions about a woman's body, who people can marry or adopt children, and other individual freedoms.

nyolfen 11y ago

marxism has very little to do with racism, sexism or homophobia

overgard 11y ago
Sure, but those labels are very useful for throwing your opponents under the bus.
Grue3 11y ago
It correlates pretty strongly. See, USSR, Maoist China, and so on.
- hga 11y ago
  As some "for instances", in the Soviet Union, Jews were labeled as such on their mandatory internal passports, not Russians or whatever, and their access to higher education was limited, and I'd hope I'd not need to point out how the Han Chinese who run the PRC treat their ethnic neighbors like the Tibetans and Uyghurs.
  - topynate 11y ago
    Certainly true as a matter of those states' fundamental hypocrisy, but I believe PopeOfNope was referring to the Left's deployment of those terms as offensive weapons - which also happened. For example, the USSR was very big on paying lip-service to anti-colonialism as a form of soft power over the non-aligned block[1]. This did not seem to noticeably affect her behaviour towards Afghanistan in the Soviet-Afghan War[2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War

al3x 11y ago

The political left in America were made enemies of the state during the era of McCarthyism. People's careers and personal lives were ruined during that Red Scare. That is "silencing". That is "limiting speech". Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? If someone is called out for racism and then voluntarily chooses to exit public life or withdraw further commentary, that's their own cowardly choice. Being criticized does not "silence" anyone. The right in America has a political and media apparatus that far outstrips that of the left in funding. Worry not: hate is no danger of being silenced in this country. Far-right demagogues continue to fill newspapers, magazines, think tank briefing, the Internet, and airwaves with their ideas despite decades of criticism from the left.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
13thLetter 11y ago
"Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"?" Well, you just personally silenced Yarvin, so there's one.
paxdickinson 11y ago
>Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? Hi, nice to meetcha.
devalier 11y ago
Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? Here is a very long list: https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-badgered-pressured-and-purged/ https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-bad... Congratulations on getting the last and final scalp. The right in America has a political and media apparatus that far outstrips that of the left in funding. The left has 99% of the university system including the entire Ivy league, which in total receives hundreds of billions of dollars in funding. The left also has most major media ranging from PBS and the NYTimes to CNN (although some are only partially under left-wing control, and will play cheerleader for war due to their own profit, not out of any right-wing ideology). The only way you can define the "right" as being stronger is if you find the left-most country out there as being the true way, and anything less than that as being rightist. A better way to look at strength is to look at who has been winning the battles. If you look at the past 50 years, the left has won most of them. If you look at the past 100 years, overall, the nation has moved way left on virtually every single issue. There has been some back-and-forth on individual issues, but overall, the direction is very clear. Worry not: hate is no danger of being silenced in this country. I don't actually have a problem with silencing hateful people. But Curtis was never hateful to minorities. He is a good person trying to make an honest critique based on the evidence as he saw it. When you purge people like that, you only make your own movement and group stupider. And that is a problem, because if you cannot investigate the true causes of a social ill without forcing people to self-censor and avoid crime-think, then you can never fix the problems.