We are being told by Cactus here that actually people should be allowed to yell Fire! in a crowded theater because, like, don’t they have a right to believe and say there is a fire? Its the obligation of everyone else to engage that person and explain from first principles what a fire is, and PROVE that there is no fire.
1 Like
Jesus lord. I’m going to try to be as nice as I can be in this post but I will admit it is difficult. This is extremely arrogant. I’ve been battling and arguing with deplorables online for 6 years now. My entire family are low info deplorables. They sound exactly, and I mean EXACTLY like a lot of the things you’re saying in this thread. Others have said it, but you’re not being honest with yourself at all. Seriously, just try to entertain the notion that you may not have all the answers.
No shit, we’re well aware of this. What we’re telling you is that whatever quick and easy sources you are consuming is bog standard deplorable bullshit. I don’t know how or why you can’t see this.
8 Likes
Like i’m probably similar to you in a way, as an example I’m extremely low info compared to this board. I don’t watch the news (or tv at all really) or read the paper. I only skim politics threads and that’s typically only when something major happens. I’ve said it before, but there was a point last year when I tuned out so much for my mental health that unless it was on John Oliver, I didn’t know much about it.
This is understandable in my opinion. Not everyone has the time or energy to follow this stuff closely.
What is not understandable would be me trying to tell the people that DO follow this extremely closely, how things really are. That’s incredibly arrogant.
3 Likes
The right wing grifting machine has spent the last thirty plus years perfecting their ability to create messages that land with the ignorant. That is the problem:
I agree with cactus we are all ignorant about stuff. However there are only two ways to deal with it. Acknowledge and know what you are ignorant about, and educate yourself.
If you know you are ignorant about something you shouldn’t just lock in to the first flotsam that passes you by. Remind yourself you are ignorant even as you are being exposed to information. And only when you have digested a wide variety of information on a particular topic from multiple view points, do you consider relinquishing your label as ignorant.
It doesn’t mean we all don’t make mistakes. All of us can take short cuts by trusting specific sources of information which still might get stuff wrong. You always got to be willing to adjust your thinking based on a preponderance of evidence.
But if someone is ignorant and just doesn’t care they are 95% likely to fall under the right wing propaganda umbrella.
3 Likes
Even if the flotsam has a base emotional appeal to my worst instincts!?!?
2 Likes
This is such a tired, old, not to mention unoriginal trope. That’s not what I’ve ever said
lmao it’s funny that someone being on record means nothing to you. I specifically said you can’t and shouldn’t be allowed to yell fire in a theater you disingenuous dweeb. If you’re gonna troll at least do it right
I appreciate the effort to try and be nice and I will always respond in kind. Can you be specific about something I said that is EXACTLY like your low life family of deplorables (your words, not mine). I’m being sincere. We can see by the drivel that mosdef wrote above that he is anything but sincere and an outright liar when it comes to things that I’ve said. You’re probably right, but give me an example
I’ve listed many of the sources I get my main opinions from and not only are they not deplorable bullshit, but they go against a lot of what I post here. I try to be independent and think for myself. I’m very open to the idea that I suck at it or am just dumb. I also stated that I’ll sometimes post a view as though it were mine from a recent live discussion I had with someone who holds that view and I had trouble arguing against it
Sorry if you think that’s shady, but there are arguments for things and against things and it shouldn’t matter who’s positions they are or where the arguments come from. And anyone who can’t articulate why a position a certain position is right or wrong in a civilized manner (as JohnnyTruant so eloquently did above), then they are worthless to me (vi0tar or whatever his name is, et.al.)
Well, I won’t do to mosdef what he did to me by misrepresenting him, but he seems to be implying that you shouldn’t be allowed to lie for your own gain, or start a conspiracy theory, etc. I don’t like liars or conspiracy theorists, but I’ll defend their right to say or promote whatever they want. And here’s why taking away their voice is so dangerous…
You can’t just go by what the public majority widely accepts as truth. There was a time when it was widely accepted that being gay was a choice and I go could on and on. Any breakthrough towards equal rights that has been gained started with whispers in a dark corner that couldn’t be said aloud
If I didn’t care, would I even post here and subject myself to the few idiots with one line insults and cartoon responses? Of course, I care!
Whose voice has been taken away?
Let me be smarter when I return and have specific examples for you lest I post more inaccurate BS. I do tend to post emotionally and I’m really gonna try and stop that. I ask for specifics and it’s only fair I provide them. Unfortunately, I can’t think of one for you right now, but I’m pretty sure there are plenty of people out there who advocate for silencing their opposition
Edit: I mean I honestly don’t have time to even search for this right now, but I could’ve sworn Mosdef just did so in a reply to me above?
This is exactly the point though. To acknowledge this, and then have an “everybody has the right to lie!” absolutist approach to speech elsewhere, is inherently wrong. The “fire in a theater” example is meant to be an instructive example, it doesn’t set out the boundary of control over speech.
See many peoples glee at the Kamala book story. 
1 Like
Or like the Russian bounty story that a lot of people were spreading on here but believing that over the “book” story could have even dangerous consequences because it beats the war drum, which people on here were doing when that was being spread
The fake book story was one of those tabloidesque news stories that wasn’t meant to be taken too seriously (there are enough legit stories to show how bad Biden border policy is) and wasn’t even meant to garner any real policy discussion. It’s like posting a meme that probably isn’t too accurate, don’t take it too seriously ;)
So I won’t be able to buy a Kamala swag bag on Ebay? I really wanted one =/.
Haha you still can but Kamala isn’t making the swag bags en masse, just a one time donation from someone else
Instead of whataboutism you could just post “my bad I got tricked by that one. I’ll be more careful”.
1 Like
I mean were many people tricked? I made a joke about swag bags at the time but I think we all knew they weren’t giving Kamala books to all of the 20k kids in custody right? Right?
And even if they were, it’s not Kamala was getting rich selling her books to the government, it’s more because they’re all unsold bargain bin stock that ended up getting donated. Because that wasn’t a real book, just a CIA/Madison Avenue joint psyop designed to try to make Kamala a thing. So yeah, it’s a conspiracy, just not the one they think.
1 Like
I mean if it had happened I would have no problem with it except the book is wildly inappropriate for locked up kids. The kids should have books and much more in these situations. Also Kamala isn’t getting rich off tens of thousands of kids books anyways. The idea it was some kind of a grift was always absurd.
Speech that incites chaos or violence should obviously be illegal. But speech that involves beliefs that are unpopular or even untrue must still be protected imo (religion anyone?)
This thread is a cluster fuck because a). I titled it wrong, and b). Used an example I briefly heard, but didn’t know near enough about it and was wrong on the details
What I really wanted to talk about was de-platforming, the dangerous ease with which disinformation can now quickly be spread, and the power that a few giant media companies have over controlling information
So just cancel this thread and anything I said in it. If/when I have time I’ll create a new thread to discuss the above topics which I think are very important. Much more so than Dawkins stupid/insensitive tweet
So talk about those things.
What are your concerns?
1 Like
Tell that to the former Mayor of Baltimore who was sentenced to 3 years in jail for using her childrens’ book as a way to get illegal kickbacks…
(This isn’t what happened in the Kamala book situation, but I think (a) it was the implication of the original article and (b) politician book deals do have the potential to be lucrative grifts).