|
Look, the murderers are completely and solely responsible for their own actions and no external factors could have contributed into turning them into murderers. Now, let me tell you about how the Islamic community is turning people into murderers...
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/12/04/theyre-coming-here-kill-us-pirro-geraldo-spar-guns-radical-islam Don't worry Fox I'm sure people will start shooting people who look like they're from the ME because they might be Muslim soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
LGD posted:Consider the possibility that getting people to stop justifying mass murder because doing so is ideologically convenient is the point. I would love someone, anyone to quote the people doing this, because it's been asked for multiple times now and so far we've seen gently caress all. No seriously, I'm waiting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
"Yes, the pig was about this high, Michelle."
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Should I just post "convincing Westerners to radicalize Muslims by demonizing them was the stated objective of the Paris attacks" every page until posters stop arguing that not playing into their hands is "victim blaming"? I mean, to be honest, it isn't "our" fault that these things happen. It's you dumb shits who have less understanding of other people than a kindergartener. If it weren't for you, terrorism would be a useless strategy and no one would bother with it. Your idiotic reaction to terrorism is to blame. Yours- personally. You are the junky who buys the terrorists' product. You are the demand. ISIS is the supplier. Stop buying. Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Should I just post "convincing Westerners to radicalize Muslims by demonizing them was the stated objective of the Paris attacks" every page until posters stop arguing that not playing into their hands is "victim blaming"? No, all violence comprises a monad of blame that exists entirely within the skin of the violencer Napoleon did nothing wrong, but those guys marching in a line with muskets, hoo boy. Their blood is upon them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
quote:How? That's the question I was trying to answer. Something lead the couple to conclude that mass murder was their best option. How would you have stopped them from concluding that? What would you have changed about their lives and/or their surroundings? quote:The difference is the change being requested of the environment. I think asking toxic work environments to be made less toxic is a reasonable request. I don't think asking women to stop existing, or to appease every man that desires them, is a reasonable request. Again, it's a breakdown of what the causes were, and what can be done about those causes. If the cause of those murders was someone failing to get laid, then maybe we should consider changing how our culture portrays the importance of sex, or something (I'm making this up, I don't know the particulars of that case). It's not about assigning blame, it's about making changes to ensure it doesn't happen again. Non-toxic work environments are reasonable. Killing an office because it's toxic very much isn't a reasonable response to one though, and it actually being a toxic environment is far from established. There are a lot of people who seem quite eager to conclude that it must have been a toxic enviornment to set these people off, and explore ways in which other people (the victims) could have changed their behavior to avoid provoking these people to kill. Which implicitly sets the victims up as the architects of their own demise- they had to have been lovely people to cause these killers to attack them. Which, I was hoping Elliot Rodger would demonstrate, they really didn't. This isn't about the end goal (which I agree with), it's about the way the killers and their victims are being discussed in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Erick Son of Erick is a literal child
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
LGD posted:Non-toxic work environments are reasonable. Killing an office because it's toxic very much isn't a reasonable response to one though, and it actually being a toxic environment is far from established. There are a lot of people who seem quite eager to conclude that it must have been a toxic enviornment to set these people off, and explore ways in which other people (the victims) could have changed their behavior to avoid provoking these people to kill. Which implicitly sets the victims up as the architects of their own demise- they had to have been lovely people to cause these killers to attack them. Which, I was hoping Elliot Rodger would demonstrate, they really didn't. This isn't about the end goal (which I agree with), it's about the way the killers and their victims are being discussed in this thread. It's not about the victims changing their behavior to avoid being killed - it's about the victims changing their behavior to not be lovely people. If you're lovely to someone, they may take umbrage and try to retaliate against you - you know the old adage, two wrongs don't make a right? If someone retaliates against you for being a lovely person toward them, they're still at fault, but you're not absolved of the blame that being an rear end in a top hat brings in the first place. Niton fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
LGD posted:What would you have changed about Elliot Rodger's life or surroundings to prevent him from going on a killing rampage? Actually, there are three large changes that I would make: First, I would change the conception of self-worth in his/our society so that male self-worth were not aggressively promoted as something exclusively measured in pussy. Second, I would change the understanding of said "pussy" from a commodity possessed by mysterious entities which reward masculinity to a biological feature of half of the human race who are otherwise not unlike him. Third, I would change his (but not ours, since mental health services are great in my community) society so that mental health were not mystified and the issues not stigmatized. E: actually, four changes: I would restrict access to guns like countries that aren't hostages to manchildren and profiteers! Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Actually, there are three large changes that I would make: SImilar to point #1, we also need to change society such that people's self worth isn't derived from financial success. And the media needs to stop sensationalizing its reporting of spree killers. Almost all of these people are suicidal and want to go out with a bang in a blaze of glory. We know how to address suicide waves; you provide services and support, and you stop sensationalized reporting of the attempts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
"How big do my balls have to be to go up against Hillary?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Actually, there are three large changes that I would make: Do you notice how all of the behavioral changes you're advocating are focused on altering Rodgers' self-conception and thought processes? But the social changes people have been advocating for most strenuously in this thread have been oriented towards changing the (alleged) behavior and thinking of the people these killers victimized? Niton posted:It's not about the victims changing their behavior to avoid being killed - it's about the victims changing their behavior to not be lovely people. If you're lovely to someone, they may take umbrage and try to retaliate against you - you know the old adage, two wrongs don't make a right? If someone retaliates against you for being a lovely person toward them, they're still at fault, but you're not absolved of the blame that being an rear end in a top hat brings in the first place. Maybe the woman who was raped was racist and really did say some awfully provocative things- if we repeatedly emphasize those facts after a rape, and argue that people should use the incident as an example of why we should try to hold more socially positive attitudes and not cause strife that leads to "chains of unfortunate events" what does that say about our real motivations? LGD fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
I know what can unite D&D again: a Gizmodo article on why spending money on infrastructure is bad because Uber doesn't get a say in where it's spent.quote:A big infrastructure bill finally passed the House this week, pushing $305 billion over five years to transit and highway projects. In the same week, Uber raised another $2.1 billion, bringing its total valuation to $62.5 billion—roughly the same amount the new bill spends on infrastructure each year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What a lovely group, I hope that was from 25 yards. Uh, if he was using a rifle he should have done better than that from 25 yards. But he was probably using a pistol so maybe it's okay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
The outstretched arms thing is basically Bernie's "Let me be clear", isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
1stGear posted:The outstretched arms thing is basically Bernie's "Let me be clear", isn't it? Maybe he's making fun of John McCain?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I know what can unite D&D again: a Gizmodo article on why spending money on infrastructure is bad because Uber doesn't get a say in where it's spent. If it impacts traffic patterns, then brilliant, dedicated data scientists will notice within a year or two and adjust their allocations accordingly. Suck it, Uberailures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I know what can unite D&D again: a Gizmodo article on why spending money on infrastructure is bad because Uber doesn't get a say in where it's spent. I'll trade the secret of road deterioration with uber in exchange for 75 noogies and 25 Golden Swirlies to the twat gently caress that wrote this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Uh, if he was using a rifle he should have done better than that from 25 yards. Even with a pistol that's still pretty bad aim. I've only been to a range 5 or 6 times but I can do better at 30 yards than that. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Slaan posted:Even with a pistol that's still pretty bad aim. I've only been to a range 5 or 6 times but I can do better at 30 yards than that. The vertical stringing lets you know he was getting excited.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Joementum posted:"Yes, the pig was about this high, Michelle." 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
O'Malley is working hard for the fishmech vote.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Why is O'Malley still running?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Oh yeah, the DoE is canceling more of the federal student loans of people who went to the now bankrupt for-profit Corinthian Colleges. This includes Everest, Heald, and WyoTech and brings the total forgiven over $500 million. Death to for-profit colleges. (Bernouts are mad that Obama isn't cancelling all student loans for everyone ever.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Why is O'Malley still running? If Clinton keels over dead he's the Establishment Understudy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What a lovely group, I hope that was from 25 yards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Oh yeah, the DoE is canceling more of the federal student loans of people who went to the now bankrupt for-profit Corinthian Colleges. This includes Everest, Heald, and WyoTech and brings the total forgiven over $500 million. Death to for-profit colleges. Bernouts would be mad that full communism now wasn't full or now enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
T. Bombastus posted:Good stuff. Does Trump have any policy positions that don't boil down to "I'm great, so it would be great"? All the moderate Republicans in my life cling to the belief that they're the party of hard-headed realism and intellectual rigor; I wonder who they're voting for in the primary? He did say he wants to go "one step further than water boarding" if he was president. Seems pretty extreme but based on studies a drowned body would yield just about as much actionable intel as someone who is being water boarded. Luigi Thirty posted:http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/12/04/theyre-coming-here-kill-us-pirro-geraldo-spar-guns-radical-islam It's pretty great when you find an article so openly persecuting a religion that you could switch it to Christianity and make the authors name Pontus Pilate and it would still make perfect historical sense or the slightly less effective but more contemporary Godwin version. And by "pretty great" I mean suicidally depressing, of course. FlamingLiberal posted:Erick Son of Erick is a literal child True, but the fact that he wrote an editorial about how he is scared to see the new Star Wars because he is afraid the theater will get attacked by ISIS then pulls this stunt makes him one of the more entertaining right wing personalities. DemeaninDemon posted:Bernouts would be mad that full communism now wasn't full or now enough. So you are saying that between Full Communism Now and Accelerationism that the truth is... in the middle?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
LGD posted:Do you notice how all of the behavioral changes you're advocating are focused on altering Rodgers' self-conception and thought processes? But the social changes people have been advocating for most strenuously in this thread have been oriented towards changing the (alleged) behavior and thinking of the people these killers victimized? Yes and no. These focus on changing society as a whole, Rodgers included. Rodgers, of course, was quite priviledged, being white/asian, male, and from a well-off family. Likewise, the behaviour of the privileged is the main area of dispute here. After all, these attacks have a simple goal- influence the majority in the West to persecute Muslims, so that some portion of Muslims will radicalize. This sets up a cycle of violence and persecution. In such a scenario, the winning move is to break the cycle on one's own end. We aren't responsible for how others react to persectution. We are responsible for our own actions, and in that case, that is persecution. Note that the victims, being dead, cannot be influenced by this discussion. Our own behaviour, and how we react to that of others within our society, can be. I don't know your motives, personally. But your line of argument is not about whether the victims are to blame. It is about our own responsibility- yours, mine, our friends and families. And your argument is in favor of abdication of responsibility in favor of blaming someone or something else. Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
No the truth is far from the middle. The only truth in this world is the absolute of death.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Wait, is D&D against student loan debt forgiveness now?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Wait, is D&D against student loan debt forgiveness now? D&D is generally against criticizing Obama from the left, I'm not sure why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
No did I say I was?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Yes and no. These focus on changing society as a whole, Rodgers included. Rodgers, of course, was quite priviledged, being white/asian, male, and from a well-off family. Yes, I'm suggesting that we clearly assign blame to those who thought that they were entitled to kill an office full of people, just as we're happy to assign blame to a rapist- they committed an act that is unconscionable regardless of how underprivileged or badly treated they may have been relative to their victim. The "behavior of the privileged" is only the main area of dispute if you're indeed seeking to justify what they did as a consequence of misbehavior on the part of "privileged" victims- i.e. they "deserved it" because the poor agency-less mass murderers had no choice in the face of their oppression but to lash out and murder 14 people. We can absolutely choose how we respond to this, in ways both good and bad. I think that minimizing the killer's responsibility for their own behavior so we can better speculate about how animus they *might* have faced from their victims led naturally to the victim's deaths is a very, very bad way to do that, and reflects quite poorly on the people doing so, regardless of how laudable their ends may be. LGD fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:If Clinton keels over dead he's the Establishment Understudy. But Biden is still alive and popular?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
didnt the killdozer guy destroy a brand new library or something gently caress that guy
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:08 |
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:True, but the fact that he wrote an editorial about how he is scared to see the new Star Wars because he is afraid the theater will get attacked by ISIS then pulls this stunt makes him one of the more entertaining right wing personalities.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:47
|
|