|
boner confessor posted:how many people are pretending to be nazis on british tv nowadays? Are we counting politicians? Like, our hate speech laws are good laws, but when they're selectively applied only after the press has decided that it's terrible when some dumb beardy fucker makes a lousy joke and not when, say, a member of the government calls for the extermination of islam, or when a prominent member of the press says that refugees are cockroaches, I think that the application of the law is not securing anything approaching justice. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 17:54 on May 31, 2017 |
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
boner confessor posted:also again i think it's extremely funny that a man with facial piercings and earplugs trying and failing to become a youtube comedy star is suddenly worried about his employment potential I work with several people who have some or all of those things so that isn't a particular barrier in the UK, they just adjust the dress code to compensate.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i mean i've seen people who work in head shops dressed that way as well but you're strictly limiting your employment potential when you cosmetically modify your face in what the west considers nontraditional ways such as tattoos, piercings, etc. this is part of the appeal of the thing to young people, to decorate one's body in a taboo fashion which marks you as someone who rejects mainstream society and the concept of having a straight job. suddenly this man has reversed himself and is very concerned about his future once he's started to face the repercussions of his behavior. it's weird how life sneaks up on you like that, huh? I suspect our laws work better to protect people from that sort of discrimination than yours do, people where I live look all sorts of odd ways, it's not a problem. People should not be penalized for their fashion choices.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:Area Man With Facial Tattoos Complains That Drug Misdemeanor Unfairly Impacts His Employment Potential I think you're being really weird with this line unless you actually think that people looking odd means they shouldn't have jobs.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i dont know how to use any simpler words to explain it. it's silly to me that someone who would damage their employment potential by getting unnecessary piercings and modifications to their face would be concerned about damaging their employment potential by comitting light hate speech. either be a social rebel or don't, you can't half rear end it and do both without looking like a coward. if you're going to be edgy, you have to go all the way, you can't retreat back into safe conformity the second that things get too real Because you should reasonably be expected to be treated like a normal human being regardless of whether you have piercings, and frankly, in the UK, saying outright nazi poo poo apparently makes you a serious political reporter who asks the tough questions and gets you a shitload of money, except if the press decides they don't like you in which case it gets you prison. It really isn't very dissonant to think that piercings are OK and lame hitler jokes are permissible and I maintain that the only reason he got done for it is because of the press deciding to gently caress up his life, not because the state actually cares about preventing that kind of speech. It should, but is the selective application of the law against people who, frankly, are not a significant problem while ignoring much worse said by much more prominent leaders of public discourse, more or less just than not applying it at all?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
I feel like "It happens so it's fine" is not a position you should take in the thread devoted to making fun of people for being egotistical internet nazis.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:only quoting you to let you know i've seen your post and chosen to ignore it because you have absolutely no idea what i'm arguing here despite me saying it multiple times in very plain english You've said something many times in very plain english but I'm not sure if it's conveying the meaning you want it to.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i say this with no offense or insult implied, but if you're a young adult in your 20's you don't really have to worry about the kinds of jobs that having facial peircings would disqualify you for. but once you cross that line into your thirties you start to be very concerned about not working at the chip shop forever and maybe cleaning up your act a bit Still not doing very well on that whole "there's something wrong with people who look odd" thing bud. Also not doing very well on the whole classism thing in general tbh.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Maybe some people just like beards and piercings, guys. Maybe that's a possibility, you bunch of old granddads.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Crain posted:loving lol. So it seems like the dude hosed up and basically guaranteed himself a guilty judgement: OTOH perhaps there shouldn't be a law against mildly irritating people. Again, our laws make a lot of things illegal but are applied selectively.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
I believe that was his initial and fairly immediate statement when this first gained media attention, before he was arrested, it is quite possibly sincere.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Crain posted:Maybe, but it's still telling that his defense is "I was TRYING to be an rear end in a top hat". Again, being a slight annoyance isn't generally supposed to be illegal.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:filming yourself speaking hate speech and choosing to upload that to the internet, and encouraging people to watch it is illegal however, even if it's done "ironically" by saying it to a dog, cat, or houseplant Unless you broadcast it to the entire country via a paper or national radio show, in which case you get paid to do it.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:the hipocrisy of the system and its bias towards the upper classes is an argument to make that same punishment apply equally, not to allow anyone to say anything they want without consequence. i can't say "well rich people get away with murder" as an argument in support of free murder However in the persistent absence of any desire to make the law equally punitive, is making it unequally punitive more or less just than making it equally permissive? If the law is de-facto "murder is illegal only if you're poor" or in this case "hate speech is illegal mostly if nobody is listening to you anyway" is the enforcement of that law not simply a distraction from the state sponsored brand of xenophobia?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:You've never heard of disturbing the peace? Or sound ordinances? Public disturbances yes and they shouldn't carry the possibility of jail sentences. Like the law as written literally means you could go to jail for telling someone to gently caress off on twitter.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Or it carries a fine, much like what this guy is facing. Which lets be honest he not going to jail he's going to pay a fine for being an rear end in a top hat which society has decided is perfectly acceptable, outside of the type of people who say an armed society is a polite society. A minimal fine and no criminal record I might consider appropriate.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i'll notify the scottish police that you've decided on an appropriate punishment in this case gently caress off with that.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:He'll pay a fine ave now have to explain to potential employers about why he was convicted of hate speech, maybe just maybe he shouldn't have been a dick and avoided all of this. Maybe justice being arbitrarily and unequally punitive is loving idiotic?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:it's equally idiotic to use the nature of inequally applied justice to argue that there should be no repercussions for crimes What part of "a small fine and no criminal record" do you parse as "no repercussions"?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
I don't think dogs can be antisemitic it might be a slightly too complicated concept for them to grasp.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i said dogs, not brits Please stop doing more damage to the concept of 'joke'
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:There was the big thing a while back that police dogs were being trained to be racist, and it's been known for a long time in places like South Africa that dogs owned by racists tend to be racist. I did say "slightly". Racist I can get but unless you have a lot of Orthodox around you'd have trouble, and you'd probably also end up with a dog that hates barristers.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:Lindsay Ellis The lass who used to be on channel awesome? Didn't know she was still making stuff, what's she do now?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Huh, cool. I figured most of that site went dead when Blip did.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I think this might actually above all (well ignoring the blatant racism and sexism) be why it got such a hugely negative reaction from the alt-right. In the old movies it was always subtext where in The Force Awakens it was just straight up 'hey look at all these horrible nazis'. Not to even mention how stoic Darth Vader got replaced by a whining Kylo Ren. Don't want anyone to get the wrong idea about your villain's? Just make them overtly pathetic. The movie even with fucks with you if you think this kind of character is cool, it was a very deliberate choice to keep Kylo in Helmet and mostly quiet for the first half the movie to then raise the veil and show the audience the bumbled mess of emotions that was hiding underneath. I was gonna say the original three movies has the empire as more like fantasy bad guys than "realistic" bad guys, which is in keeping with the idea that it's a fantasy film with the words "laser" or "space" placed in front of a lot of the nouns.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:That's kind of the entire selling point of Protestantism. Nightmares?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I thought the standard response was "They'll be private" and then just... not think about it anymore, about what it actually loving means for a road to be private. What happens when private road A needs to connect to separately-owned-and-managed private road B? Extremely aggressive lane restructuring.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
I assume that's what was intended but I think that arguably makes even less sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Does that mean that the voluntarily celibate are the most truly rational? Because that doesn't seem right. Someone obviously isn't aware of the power of volcel, not allowing women to steal your semen energy makes you powerful.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
I want an fplus episode on volcel.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
I'd also have to come down on that being a... pretty big flaw to ignore. Like, some opinions are deeply unattractive regardless of the body they are attached to.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
How the hell do you do socialism for some? That doesn't even parse.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
I'm having trouble visualizing what that even is though, unless it's like, state supported luxury space communism combined with some kind of weird ancient Greek patrician thing where women and minorities aren't really people.business hammocks posted:White people vote for socialism overwhelmingly when it's for whites only. He is literally the real-world version of the guy who votes for Bernie because he wants free stuff. Ok apparently it's literally that, great. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
I suppose I would probably say that that doesn't really bear any resemblance to socialism but I imagine that's also the point.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
I guess that also doesn't really seem very socialist..? I mean to be honest I don't even know if Affirmative Action is what I'd call socialist, it's good, but it seems like a pretty specific solution to a problem and I'd probably say if anything it seems more like a liberal style solution. A socialist solution would be like, integrated unionization or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
When you're saying National Socialism you mean nazism, yes? Or does the term now mean something else in American political discourse?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Yeah but even social democracy is, like, universal. The NHS doesn't have a sign on the door that says no blacks no irish.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Again, there's piles of tries in the US to create a social democratic system that excludes minorities. That's half the point of the original New Deal, which gave scraps to decent people and lots of make-work to disposable whites. And shockingly, you saw support for social democracy disappear among these people as soon as the system got extended to actually deserving people. It's only come back into vogue for them now that their tenuous position on the economic ladder is affected again. UKIP are libertarian nutters with a xenophobic bent. I suppose the BNP might theoretically have been that but they're also literal nazis so I wouldn't really call them socialist because I assume their socialism is just a front for fascism. It's just... it's really hard for me to understand the use of the word socialism or social democracy or anything like that because no implementation of those I've experienced has come with the rider "except no black people". They're explicitly universalist because that's the motivation that created them, they were created in response to internationalist communist agitation as an appeasement. The words just mean really different things to me I guess. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:You are right, I confused the two in my head. BNP is what I meant. And I actually wouldn't doubt they'd be all about helping give the EDL-types and ultras a leg up in the economy, since that's their literal voter base. Nationalist Socialism is exactly what fascism is. And I'm not saying it as a knock on Socialism, since there's a shot at having a decent society out of it so long as it doesn't end up being some White Worker's Paradise socially conservative hellhole. Ehhhhh, I dunno about that. Fascism has not historically been especially socialist. There was socialist rhetoric employed in the early days of the Nazis but they didn't actually act on it, eventually it just became plain old autocracy. That's part of why I get confused, nazism and socialism aren't really related, socialism doesn't have to be autocratic and nazism isn't at all bound to being socialist. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 16:20 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That's because they murdered or drove into exile the entire left wing of their party. The Nazi left (which ordinarily sounds like a phrase only PJW would say while holding back tears) were socialist about nationalized industries and workers' revolution and cradle to grave social care. They were also terrible people about almost everything else. Oh aye you can have autocratic dickhead socialism and the Nazis could have gone economically left but it's still hard to understand what is meant when people use nazi, national socialist, and socialist kind of interchangeably because they mean a lot of different things.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 16:50
|
|
