3 ms·

Well, he is an active detractor of Democracy, it's possible he could try to spread his agenda through technology (take a look at the colonialist imagery in Urbi

by leppr 11y ago

Well, he is an active detractor of Democracy, it's possible he could try to spread his agenda through technology (take a look at the colonialist imagery in Urbit). His view on gender 'roles' is also dangerously close to hate speech (and before any of you calls me an islamophobic: as a non-muslim white male he has no cultural heritage that could justify his opinion, so it's different).

tjradcliffe 11y ago
I have very little idea what Yarvin's view on "gender roles" is but assume it's a traditional Anglo-European one that subjugates women to men, the same as virtually every culture everywhere has before the past hundred-odd years. So this seems to suggest that you believe that "non-Muslim white males" have no cultural heritage whatsoever, which is... odd.
theorique 11y ago
This still doesn't explain why Yarvin being present at a conference, giving a non-political talk on technology (presumably with no so-called "hate speech" content), represents a threat to anything or anyone at said conference. The answer is: it doesn't. He was removed because some politically influential leftists wanted him declared a non-person.
anon_adderlan 11y ago
> Well, he is an active detractor of Democracy The trouble with democracy is that it's not a system of government where everyone has their say, but one where the majority rules. A democracy does not protect individual rights, but the 'rights' of the majority. And members are not required to have any skills or qualifications before making an impact on how the government is run. Democracy is NOT an ideal, there's a lot to criticize, and even the founders of the United States understood this. But all these excluded middle thinkers think that if you're critical of democracy, then you're pro communist/socialist/monarchist/etc, which is nonsense. Here's a relevant example of where relying on democracy would have compromised citizens constitutional rights. http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/06/12/gay_marriage_alabama_shows_why_civil_rights_shouldn_t_be_put_to_popular.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/06/12/gay_marriage_a... > His view on gender 'roles' is also dangerously close to hate speech Then you really have no idea what hate speech is, and should ask someone who survived the holocaust or had a cross burning in their front yard. > and before any of you calls me an islamophobic: as a non-muslim white male he has no cultural heritage that could justify his opinion, so it's different. When the hell did islamophobia enter the picture?!? Regardless, you don't need 'cultural heritage' to 'justify' an opinion. You do however need facts to support a conclusion. Are you saying that certain conclusions can only be made by those with a specific cultural heritage, regardless of the facts?

by leppr 11y ago

tjradcliffe 11y ago

I have very little idea what Yarvin's view on "gender roles" is but assume it's a traditional Anglo-European one that subjugates women to men, the same as virtually every culture everywhere has before the past hundred-odd years. So this seems to suggest that you believe that "non-Muslim white males" have no cultural heritage whatsoever, which is... odd.

theorique 11y ago

This still doesn't explain why Yarvin being present at a conference, giving a non-political talk on technology (presumably with no so-called "hate speech" content), represents a threat to anything or anyone at said conference. The answer is: it doesn't. He was removed because some politically influential leftists wanted him declared a non-person.

anon_adderlan 11y ago

> Well, he is an active detractor of Democracy The trouble with democracy is that it's not a system of government where everyone has their say, but one where the majority rules. A democracy does not protect individual rights, but the 'rights' of the majority. And members are not required to have any skills or qualifications before making an impact on how the government is run. Democracy is NOT an ideal, there's a lot to criticize, and even the founders of the United States understood this. But all these excluded middle thinkers think that if you're critical of democracy, then you're pro communist/socialist/monarchist/etc, which is nonsense. Here's a relevant example of where relying on democracy would have compromised citizens constitutional rights. http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/06/12/gay_marriage_alabama_shows_why_civil_rights_shouldn_t_be_put_to_popular.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/06/12/gay_marriage_a... > His view on gender 'roles' is also dangerously close to hate speech Then you really have no idea what hate speech is, and should ask someone who survived the holocaust or had a cross burning in their front yard. > and before any of you calls me an islamophobic: as a non-muslim white male he has no cultural heritage that could justify his opinion, so it's different. When the hell did islamophobia enter the picture?!? Regardless, you don't need 'cultural heritage' to 'justify' an opinion. You do however need facts to support a conclusion. Are you saying that certain conclusions can only be made by those with a specific cultural heritage, regardless of the facts?