HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

yerwhat01010

no profile record

コメント

yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
> Judges understand that "speech I hate" isn't the legal standard for hate speech.

They do for now. But if you'd been paying attention lately, you'd know that the dominant ideology among our elite universities and a growing number of our institutions is no longer liberalism, under which free speech is valued. Liberalism has been replaced in the univeristy by critical theory, and its offshoots like critical race theory, under which it is absolutely 100% taught that hate speech is precisely equivalent to "speech I hate", or more accurately, speech the left hates. Argue back and you'll probably get sent that meme about Popper's paradox of tolerance, but it's actually based in the Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse's theory of "repressive tolerance", which basically states that far-left radicalism should be tolerated and nothing else.

Critical race theory (which could best be summarised as "anti-scholarship racism masquerading as anti-racist scholarship") was born in law schools and is now being taught as unquestioned fact throughout the education system, to children at an increasingly young age (which is the whole point of cancelling Dr. Seuss - so they can shoehorn in pro-CRT books to children instead.) Lest you think I'm being paranoid, here's none other than the American Bar Assocation propping up CRT: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_r...

Where do you think the next generation of judges is going to come from? Don't say you weren't warned.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I've seen that infographic about "white culture" before (hello to my fellow New Discourses fan) and it's such a great illustration of how this movement is not only insane, but absurdly racist.

They think that aspects of "white culture" include "following rigid time schedules", "rational linear thinking" and "being polite"!!! What is the implication of this? That black culture doesn't bother with such trivialities as good timekeeping, rationality and being polite? Is this from an "anti-racist" document or a Klan pamphlet?

(Also, anyone who thinks there's anything inherently "white" about following rigid time schedules has obviously never spent much time in southern Europe.)
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I've heard reports from Chinese immigrants who lived through the Cultural Revolution and are saying the same thing - maybe not that what's happening is "exactly" the same but that we're very much heading that way.

We should be very worried, and we need to take action.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I would also like to hear more details about this story.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
Really? I'm from the UK and I find "hey guys" and "you guys" to be quite common there. Maybe it's a generational thing - I'm sure it's something we picked up from the U.S..

The idea that it's sexist or problematic to address a mixed group as "guys" doesn't quite seem to have crossed the Atlantic yet, but I'm sure it's coming. The U.K. is never too far behind American cultural trends, especially the insane ones.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I've heard people say it's racist for white people to say "y'all" too, since black people say "y'all" therefore it's cultural appropriation.

Nevermind that "y'all" is common among white Southerners (where do you think African Americans picked it up from?). Why let facts get in the way of your attempts to control people?
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
It's the purest of narcissism. When you say "intent doesn't matter", what you're actually saying is "you don't matter. The only thing that matters is how I feel about it". It's a manipulative trick used to invalidate everyone's feelings except your own. I'd expect it from a child, and it astonishes me that grown adults can't see through it.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
But the ever-present question is "who defines hate speech?" Most people's definition of the term seems to be "speech that I hate."

This won't end well.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
That's the whole point. It's a billion-dollar industry created by useless people with no real economic value. They need to inject racism and sexism and division into every situation so they can claim credit for opposing it. How else are they going to justify their bloated paycheques?
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I tend not to view people who insist on forcing others to make political statements they don't agree with as "mature adults."
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
You're not the only one. People are started to organise against this poison - in fact I read just yesterday about the launch of one new organisation to push back: https://www.fairforall.org/

There's strength in numbers. We must speak up.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
Voldemort!
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
You give them too much credit. Injecting racial division is the entire point. Critical race theorists want to divide everyone up by their immutable characteristics, discriminate on the basis of race, and make everyone as hyper-conscious about skin colour as possible. They explicitly say that they want to undermine the American liberal order and do away with such concepts as legal neutrality and equality under the law; here's a quote from page 3 of Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, one of the leading textbooks:

> Unlike traditional civil rights discourse, which stresses incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.

You saw this with Trump's anti-CRT executive order, widely misreported as "banning diversity training" or "banning federal employees and contractors from being taught about racism". People who claim that this is what the EO said either haven't read it or they're deliberately lying; section 10 of the order explicitly says that diversity training is still allowed.

What the EO actually banned was "diversity" or other training which teaches any of nine specific things, all of which are perfectly reasonable ideas to not want in government, for example that "one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex" or "an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex." Look it up yourself; read the full list of nine points and tell me which ones you would want to see taught to government employees (or anyone else).

Wokeists went nuts at this EO, and Biden reversed it on his first day. Why? Because they want to discriminate, scapegoat and spread stereotypes based on race and sex. What other possible explanation could there be? Wake up.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
Exactly. The worst thing you can do when dealing with bullies is to give them what they're asking for.

Seuss won't be the last beloved cultural icon they come for. At what point are we going to stand up to these lunatics?
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
This is why you should support New Hampshire's bill HB 544, currently working its way through the NH legislature, and support similar bills that are nascent in other states (off the top of my head: Oklahoma, Iowa, West Virginia, maybe some others I've missed) and, if you're not in those states, contact your elected representatives and push for a similar bill.

The only way this poison is going to be defeated is through the law. In fact, the journalist Chris Rufo argues that much of what's pushed by the CRT activists is likely already illegal under the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act. This needs to be affirmed in the courts.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
The point is to taint Dr Seuss so that he's no longer acceptable as a common cultural reference point, so that ideologues can shoehorn in their own propaganda to children at the youngest possible age. Listen to the latest episode of the New Discoures podcast if you want a full explanation.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
I watched The Simpsons religiously growing up and I never realised Mayor Quimby is supposed to be an Irish immigrant. Where is that established? He doesn't have an Irish accent.
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
Amazon is censoring books now too: https://abigailshrier.substack.com/p/book-banning-in-an-age-...
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
How much further down this path do we have to go before people understand that it's about the principle, not the specific case at hand? It only took two years to go from "it's okay for Big Tech to boot Alex Jones off all their platforms" from "it's okay for Big Tech to decide which books we're allowed to read to our children". How much more power are we going to let these private enterprises accumulate? Where is this leading?
yerwhat01010
·5 年前·議論
There is absolute no chance that these radicals will not come for Shakespeare eventually. Their aim is to destroy the Western canon so they can replace it with their own propaganda: Shakespeare is too high-value a target for them to ignore.