The problem with Desmond Tutu’s quote:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

I don't understand your point. The Allied armies DID stop the Holocaust. It took years, and the loss of thousands of American lives, but it was stopped. People who say that the U.S., including FDR, did not do enough, soon enough, don't understand how close the Nazi's came to victory in WW II.

The American people DID abolish slavery. At the cost of thousands of American lives in a Civil War. Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment. (I might add that slavery exists in many parts of the world today, mainly in the middle east. What do you propose to do about it?)

DP. According to those who believe we must speak out against injustice, we must speak out. Maybe even go fight a war over there that costs thousands of American lives, thus proving our morality by doing the right thing rather than just speaking platitudes.

Yes, their outrage at "not speaking out" really is an outrage that we are not suffering like those who they think are oppressed. How dare we live our happy lived when so and so is suffering? They demand a sacrificial offering of some sort. This is why they celebrated that young Airman who set himself on fire a few months ago.

Some of us are capable of empathy and humanity. I know it's hard for you to understand since you lack both.

We just don't care. Some of us don't police thoughts and feelings and don't want ours policed. I don't want you studying my social media account or water cooler chats at work then judging vocally of I am "concerned" enough about your pet cause.

I'm sorry that my caring about the lives of other human beings triggers you so much. I'll try to do better.

What a beautiful soul you are.

Or wait, maybe the words are “insufferable twat”.

Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

Only the finest people call others "insufferable twats" for calling about other humans. We should all learn from you.

Or, maybe, I'm just holding up a mirror to your face and you hate what you see. Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

The thing is the word "caring" means nothing. You telling me on the internet you care about something, ok what is the catch, what are you obligating me to? "I am so emotional, now YOU must do this!". Society feels like we are now ruled by the borderline personality afflicted mob.

You have serious mental health issues. Please address those ASAP.

And you sound like a narcissist. No one needs to be obsessed with your thoughts and emotions and take action on them. You can sit in the middle of the street and cry and scream and shiver while calling something unjust. I don't care. I don't have to form an opinion or take action on things that happen in the world that are beyond my sphere of influence.

I think mass immigration has caused an issue--people come here, and expect all of us to begin to take action to solve issues in their home countries and take on the problems emotionally. Yeah most of us are not.

You're a peach. Seek help.

That is your dilemma, you spend your life making all these little judgement against people as if you are some little God. All day you tell people "care more!" "Care about this!" "You are mean!" "You are a peach" "You are awful" "seek help!" "Look at this this is important!". You really are just a self-declared dictator and we are not having it.

You're so right. People who want to save others from oppression are usually dictators.

Of course! dictators normally believe they are being benevolent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

I don't understand your point. The Allied armies DID stop the Holocaust. It took years, and the loss of thousands of American lives, but it was stopped. People who say that the U.S., including FDR, did not do enough, soon enough, don't understand how close the Nazi's came to victory in WW II.

The American people DID abolish slavery. At the cost of thousands of American lives in a Civil War. Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment. (I might add that slavery exists in many parts of the world today, mainly in the middle east. What do you propose to do about it?)

DP. According to those who believe we must speak out against injustice, we must speak out. Maybe even go fight a war over there that costs thousands of American lives, thus proving our morality by doing the right thing rather than just speaking platitudes.

Yes, their outrage at "not speaking out" really is an outrage that we are not suffering like those who they think are oppressed. How dare we live our happy lived when so and so is suffering? They demand a sacrificial offering of some sort. This is why they celebrated that young Airman who set himself on fire a few months ago.

Some of us are capable of empathy and humanity. I know it's hard for you to understand since you lack both.

We just don't care. Some of us don't police thoughts and feelings and don't want ours policed. I don't want you studying my social media account or water cooler chats at work then judging vocally of I am "concerned" enough about your pet cause.

I'm sorry that my caring about the lives of other human beings triggers you so much. I'll try to do better.

What a beautiful soul you are.

Or wait, maybe the words are “insufferable twat”.

Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

Only the finest people call others "insufferable twats" for calling about other humans. We should all learn from you.

Or, maybe, I'm just holding up a mirror to your face and you hate what you see. Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

The thing is the word "caring" means nothing. You telling me on the internet you care about something, ok what is the catch, what are you obligating me to? "I am so emotional, now YOU must do this!". Society feels like we are now ruled by the borderline personality afflicted mob.

You have serious mental health issues. Please address those ASAP.

And you sound like a narcissist. No one needs to be obsessed with your thoughts and emotions and take action on them. You can sit in the middle of the street and cry and scream and shiver while calling something unjust. I don't care. I don't have to form an opinion or take action on things that happen in the world that are beyond my sphere of influence.

I think mass immigration has caused an issue--people come here, and expect all of us to begin to take action to solve issues in their home countries and take on the problems emotionally. Yeah most of us are not.

You're a peach. Seek help.

That is your dilemma, you spend your life making all these little judgement against people as if you are some little God. All day you tell people "care more!" "Care about this!" "You are mean!" "You are a peach" "You are awful" "seek help!" "Look at this this is important!". You really are just a self-declared dictator and we are not having it.

You're so right. People who want to save others from oppression are usually dictators.

Of course! dictators normally believe they are being benevolent.

again, please seek help. You are delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

I don't understand your point. The Allied armies DID stop the Holocaust. It took years, and the loss of thousands of American lives, but it was stopped. People who say that the U.S., including FDR, did not do enough, soon enough, don't understand how close the Nazi's came to victory in WW II.

The American people DID abolish slavery. At the cost of thousands of American lives in a Civil War. Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment. (I might add that slavery exists in many parts of the world today, mainly in the middle east. What do you propose to do about it?)

DP. According to those who believe we must speak out against injustice, we must speak out. Maybe even go fight a war over there that costs thousands of American lives, thus proving our morality by doing the right thing rather than just speaking platitudes.

Yes, their outrage at "not speaking out" really is an outrage that we are not suffering like those who they think are oppressed. How dare we live our happy lived when so and so is suffering? They demand a sacrificial offering of some sort. This is why they celebrated that young Airman who set himself on fire a few months ago.

Some of us are capable of empathy and humanity. I know it's hard for you to understand since you lack both.

We just don't care. Some of us don't police thoughts and feelings and don't want ours policed. I don't want you studying my social media account or water cooler chats at work then judging vocally of I am "concerned" enough about your pet cause.

I'm sorry that my caring about the lives of other human beings triggers you so much. I'll try to do better.

What a beautiful soul you are.

Or wait, maybe the words are “insufferable twat”.

Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

Only the finest people call others "insufferable twats" for calling about other humans. We should all learn from you.

Or, maybe, I'm just holding up a mirror to your face and you hate what you see. Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

The thing is the word "caring" means nothing. You telling me on the internet you care about something, ok what is the catch, what are you obligating me to? "I am so emotional, now YOU must do this!". Society feels like we are now ruled by the borderline personality afflicted mob.

You have serious mental health issues. Please address those ASAP.

And you sound like a narcissist. No one needs to be obsessed with your thoughts and emotions and take action on them. You can sit in the middle of the street and cry and scream and shiver while calling something unjust. I don't care. I don't have to form an opinion or take action on things that happen in the world that are beyond my sphere of influence.

I think mass immigration has caused an issue--people come here, and expect all of us to begin to take action to solve issues in their home countries and take on the problems emotionally. Yeah most of us are not.

You're a peach. Seek help.

That is your dilemma, you spend your life making all these little judgement against people as if you are some little God. All day you tell people "care more!" "Care about this!" "You are mean!" "You are a peach" "You are awful" "seek help!" "Look at this this is important!". You really are just a self-declared dictator and we are not having it.

You're so right. People who want to save others from oppression are usually dictators.

Of course! dictators normally believe they are being benevolent.

again, please seek help. You are delusional.

There you do with your god-like behavior again. You do not see a pattern? All you do is tell others what to think and do and instruct them on how to respond to your emotions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

I don't understand your point. The Allied armies DID stop the Holocaust. It took years, and the loss of thousands of American lives, but it was stopped. People who say that the U.S., including FDR, did not do enough, soon enough, don't understand how close the Nazi's came to victory in WW II.

The American people DID abolish slavery. At the cost of thousands of American lives in a Civil War. Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment. (I might add that slavery exists in many parts of the world today, mainly in the middle east. What do you propose to do about it?)

DP. According to those who believe we must speak out against injustice, we must speak out. Maybe even go fight a war over there that costs thousands of American lives, thus proving our morality by doing the right thing rather than just speaking platitudes.

Yes, their outrage at "not speaking out" really is an outrage that we are not suffering like those who they think are oppressed. How dare we live our happy lived when so and so is suffering? They demand a sacrificial offering of some sort. This is why they celebrated that young Airman who set himself on fire a few months ago.

Some of us are capable of empathy and humanity. I know it's hard for you to understand since you lack both.

We just don't care. Some of us don't police thoughts and feelings and don't want ours policed. I don't want you studying my social media account or water cooler chats at work then judging vocally of I am "concerned" enough about your pet cause.

I'm sorry that my caring about the lives of other human beings triggers you so much. I'll try to do better.

What a beautiful soul you are.

Or wait, maybe the words are “insufferable twat”.

Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

Only the finest people call others "insufferable twats" for calling about other humans. We should all learn from you.

Or, maybe, I'm just holding up a mirror to your face and you hate what you see. Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

The thing is the word "caring" means nothing. You telling me on the internet you care about something, ok what is the catch, what are you obligating me to? "I am so emotional, now YOU must do this!". Society feels like we are now ruled by the borderline personality afflicted mob.

You have serious mental health issues. Please address those ASAP.

And you sound like a narcissist. No one needs to be obsessed with your thoughts and emotions and take action on them. You can sit in the middle of the street and cry and scream and shiver while calling something unjust. I don't care. I don't have to form an opinion or take action on things that happen in the world that are beyond my sphere of influence.

I think mass immigration has caused an issue--people come here, and expect all of us to begin to take action to solve issues in their home countries and take on the problems emotionally. Yeah most of us are not.

You're a peach. Seek help.

That is your dilemma, you spend your life making all these little judgement against people as if you are some little God. All day you tell people "care more!" "Care about this!" "You are mean!" "You are a peach" "You are awful" "seek help!" "Look at this this is important!". You really are just a self-declared dictator and we are not having it.

You're so right. People who want to save others from oppression are usually dictators.

Of course! dictators normally believe they are being benevolent.

again, please seek help. You are delusional.

Sorry you are not aware of history. But you are God so you create history I guess? You feel dictators are never advocating for a cause so what you feel is true, because you are you and you are Truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

I don't understand your point. The Allied armies DID stop the Holocaust. It took years, and the loss of thousands of American lives, but it was stopped. People who say that the U.S., including FDR, did not do enough, soon enough, don't understand how close the Nazi's came to victory in WW II.

The American people DID abolish slavery. At the cost of thousands of American lives in a Civil War. Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment. (I might add that slavery exists in many parts of the world today, mainly in the middle east. What do you propose to do about it?)

DP. According to those who believe we must speak out against injustice, we must speak out. Maybe even go fight a war over there that costs thousands of American lives, thus proving our morality by doing the right thing rather than just speaking platitudes.

Yes, their outrage at "not speaking out" really is an outrage that we are not suffering like those who they think are oppressed. How dare we live our happy lived when so and so is suffering? They demand a sacrificial offering of some sort. This is why they celebrated that young Airman who set himself on fire a few months ago.

Some of us are capable of empathy and humanity. I know it's hard for you to understand since you lack both.

We just don't care. Some of us don't police thoughts and feelings and don't want ours policed. I don't want you studying my social media account or water cooler chats at work then judging vocally of I am "concerned" enough about your pet cause.

I'm sorry that my caring about the lives of other human beings triggers you so much. I'll try to do better.

What a beautiful soul you are.

Or wait, maybe the words are “insufferable twat”.

Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

Only the finest people call others "insufferable twats" for calling about other humans. We should all learn from you.

Or, maybe, I'm just holding up a mirror to your face and you hate what you see. Who can tell, in this world full of ambiguities?

The thing is the word "caring" means nothing. You telling me on the internet you care about something, ok what is the catch, what are you obligating me to? "I am so emotional, now YOU must do this!". Society feels like we are now ruled by the borderline personality afflicted mob.

You have serious mental health issues. Please address those ASAP.

And you sound like a narcissist. No one needs to be obsessed with your thoughts and emotions and take action on them. You can sit in the middle of the street and cry and scream and shiver while calling something unjust. I don't care. I don't have to form an opinion or take action on things that happen in the world that are beyond my sphere of influence.

I think mass immigration has caused an issue--people come here, and expect all of us to begin to take action to solve issues in their home countries and take on the problems emotionally. Yeah most of us are not.

You're a peach. Seek help.

That is your dilemma, you spend your life making all these little judgement against people as if you are some little God. All day you tell people "care more!" "Care about this!" "You are mean!" "You are a peach" "You are awful" "seek help!" "Look at this this is important!". You really are just a self-declared dictator and we are not having it.

You're so right. People who want to save others from oppression are usually dictators.

Of course! dictators normally believe they are being benevolent.

again, please seek help. You are delusional.

There you do with your god-like behavior again. You do not see a pattern? All you do is tell others what to think and do and instruct them on how to respond to your emotions.

*There you go not "do"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

I was 12. Sorry for what you went through, but what do you think I should have done to intervene?

And you obviously avoided answering the very simple question of what actions are YOU (personally) taking on what issues? Anyone can command some nebulous royal you to *do something*, but talk is cheap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

Nobody is using this quote against you. You are so have such a damn victim mentality, it's exhausting. The OP (is that you?) said the quote is problematic, and people are explaining what it meant and why. Apartheid was a rare event, sure, but that's what the damn quote is about. How sensitive do you have to be to be offended about that?

And just fwiw, apartheid WAS ended, in part, by a lot of people speaking up. And it WASN'T obviously wrong at the time. Reagan considered Nelson Mandela a communist terrorist, and presumably a lot of his voters did too. But not enough of them, because in 1986 - two years after this quote - Congress overruled Reagan to impose sanctions on South Africa. Obviously US sanctions weren't the reason apartheid eventually ended, but they helped. They were the role we could play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

I never said that everyone who is not on my team is a Nazi? Where in the world are you getting that????

I did say that I am a genocide survivor so this is very personal and very real to me. It affected me directly in a very real way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

I was 12. Sorry for what you went through, but what do you think I should have done to intervene?

And you obviously avoided answering the very simple question of what actions are YOU (personally) taking on what issues? Anyone can command some nebulous royal you to *do something*, but talk is cheap.

I think you know that I didn't mean that a 12 year old you should have done anything or was expected to do anything.

Talk is indeed cheap which is why asking your government to intervene where we see injustices is much better than turning our head in the opposite direction and pretending is more ambiguous about who is wrong than it really is. One of the reasons I voted for Joe Biden is because he stood in front of congress in 1995 and demanded that the US stop the genocide. I'm sure it was partly because of his personal convictions and his visit to Bosnia, but hopefully it was also because his constituents wanted him to act. THAT is what we can all do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

I was 12. Sorry for what you went through, but what do you think I should have done to intervene?

And you obviously avoided answering the very simple question of what actions are YOU (personally) taking on what issues? Anyone can command some nebulous royal you to *do something*, but talk is cheap.

I think you know that I didn't mean that a 12 year old you should have done anything or was expected to do anything.

Talk is indeed cheap which is why asking your government to intervene where we see injustices is much better than turning our head in the opposite direction and pretending is more ambiguous about who is wrong than it really is. One of the reasons I voted for Joe Biden is because he stood in front of congress in 1995 and demanded that the US stop the genocide. I'm sure it was partly because of his personal convictions and his visit to Bosnia, but hopefully it was also because his constituents wanted him to act. THAT is what we can all do.

But again, not everyone agrees on what is right and wrong and some people believe certain issues are not black and white. You want us to make activists moral authorities, and for most of us they are not. I do not have to do what they tell me to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

I never said that everyone who is not on my team is a Nazi? Where in the world are you getting that????

I did say that I am a genocide survivor so this is very personal and very real to me. It affected me directly in a very real way.

This does not mean:
--you are smart
--you know the best ways to achieve diplomacy
--you can demand what we are to think
--you are a moral authority

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

I never said that everyone who is not on my team is a Nazi? Where in the world are you getting that????

I did say that I am a genocide survivor so this is very personal and very real to me. It affected me directly in a very real way.

This does not mean:
--you are smart
--you know the best ways to achieve diplomacy
--you can demand what we are to think
--you are a moral authority

Nor does it mean you know anything about history, or that you are particularly "caring" about about anything. Who knows, your experience could have made you bitter and hateful. You seem hateful here, that we did not suffer like everyone else who has suffered (including you)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

I never said that everyone who is not on my team is a Nazi? Where in the world are you getting that????

I did say that I am a genocide survivor so this is very personal and very real to me. It affected me directly in a very real way.

This does not mean:
--you are smart
--you know the best ways to achieve diplomacy
--you can demand what we are to think
--you are a moral authority

Nor does it mean you know anything about history, or that you are particularly "caring" about about anything. Who knows, your experience could have made you bitter and hateful. You seem hateful here, that we did not suffer like everyone else who has suffered (including you)

I am saying things you don’t agree with and are making you uncomfortable. That doesn’t mean I’m being hateful. Personal insults like that are making you look desperate.

I’m not going to respond any more. You can take cheap shots at me and what I’ve lived through. Fine with me. Doesn’t mean that people who took action in 95 to save my life were wrong even though it wasn’t happening to them. Good night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad that there are still people in this world who can see and determine for themselves that some things are clearly unjust and need to stop. In this age of whataboutism and people with no moral compass, I can see why OP is struggling with Tutu's quote.

1) was the holocaust something we should have stopped OP?
2) was slavery something that should have been abolished?
3) if you see a man, beating his wife and her unable to defend herself because he is twice her size, do you ask yourself what she did to provoke him?

This is exactly the simplistic moralizing that causes people like OP to not want to engage with you.

Simplistic moralizing? Explain EXACTLY what you mean by that and what should have been done instead in each example.

EXACTLY what I mean is that those examples are clearly wrong, but there are many examples that people will assertively tell you are omg just like the Holocaust, slavery, apartheid, abuse, etc.

And they either are not the same at all or at least aren’t clearly so. And arguing with people who have a, yes, simplistic view is exhausting and annoying and I can see why someone would want to avoid doing it and thus avoid “picking a side” and then be accused of “siding with the oppressors!!” for refusing to validate histrionic oversimplifications.

So then list some of those ambiguous examples instead of telling me how wrong I am for pointing out that there are times in history when it's clear as day. That is what Tutu was talking about.

It is not my fault you have no moral compass and gumption and can't or won't discern when something is clearly wrong. I am tired of people who are puposefuly obtuse and want to "both sides" everything." Sure, sometimes, perhaps even lots of the time things are not black and white. But that's not what Tutu was talking about so stop hiding behind phrases like "simplistic moralizing."

Friend, no one is saying that there is no such thing as clearcut moral situations ever. But no, I sure am not going to trot out examples so you can explain to me how in your opinion this ambiguous example is not in fact ambiguous, which you had insight into because you have drunk the Righteousness Juice.

If you are one of these charming people who harangue those who tell you they are not taking sides on a particular issue, you might want to check yourself. Accept that not everyone is open to hearing your message, and that not everyone is going to agree with you, and no one owes you discussion. If someone says “I am neutral on this issue” then respect them and don’t talk to them about it.

And if you are convinced in your bones that whatever is OMG just like apartheid/the Holocaust/slavery etc then I’m sure you can find plenty of validation by people who will exactly agree with you. And this is maybe why nobody outside that bubble wants to talk to you.

You are just prattling on because you have no moral compass and get triggered when people bring up clear examples of what Tutu was talking about. I didn't bring up situations that were unclear. I brought up clear-cut examples and that is what you objected to and called "simplistic moralizing." There are times in history (and yes, current events) that call for us to take action and not turn our heads the other way. By choosing to ignore the injustice, we are allowing it to continue to exist. The fact that you got offended by Tutu's quote is very telling of the kind of person you are: a coward.

NP

Pray tell, what actions are you taking on what issues, exactly?

Listen, moron, I am a genocide survivor. I hate to mention it because idiots like you will demean it and minimize it. It was clear-cut in 1995 when over 8000 men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica that the world should intervene and stop the atrocities. I'm glad that people who are better than you had the gumption and the empathy to save my life and lives of many others.

Yes, diplomats and people in the military did that work. What do/did you want from the rest of us?

Just be a decent human and not call it simplistic moralizing when some of us get involved to stop what is clearly wrong. Is that too much to ask?

Nobody on this thread has said that you shouldn’t get involved to stop what you see as clearly wrong. Nobody.

This thread is about deciding that other people are (per the quote) either with you or against you, and saying that those who are not vocally aligned with your cause are supporting injustice.

That’s a statement that you can get away with if you’re Desmond Tutu, but one most fairly uninformed activists are in no position at all to be making.

But who are you to decide who is an informed activist and what their motivations are? Protests happen for all sort of reasons, if that's what you're talking about. People have a right to their opinions even if it's something you decide is ineffective or worthless. You would never know what I've been through or what motivates me if you just met me.

Lastly, we are talking about Desmond Tutu and what he meant by his words. He was speaking on behalf of his people. He had a big platform and used it. Not everyone who sees the injustice and wants to do something to change it is able to do it in the same way.

Of course people has a right to their opinions. Nobody has said differently.

People also have a right to hold their opinions privately or to actually be neutral. The exceptions to this are rare. Slavery-rare, Holocaust-rare. Wielding this quote to support your current cause is breathtakingly arrogant in almost all situations.

If you are not doing that, if you are respecting that other people can have legitimate different viewpoints, ones they may or may not choose to share with you, then rock on.

If you are using this quote to explain why everyone who isn’t Team You is a Nazi, then I’m going to have to go with “insufferable twat”.

Which is it?

I never said that everyone who is not on my team is a Nazi? Where in the world are you getting that????

I did say that I am a genocide survivor so this is very personal and very real to me. It affected me directly in a very real way.

This does not mean:
--you are smart
--you know the best ways to achieve diplomacy
--you can demand what we are to think
--you are a moral authority

Nor does it mean you know anything about history, or that you are particularly "caring" about about anything. Who knows, your experience could have made you bitter and hateful. You seem hateful here, that we did not suffer like everyone else who has suffered (including you)

I am saying things you don’t agree with and are making you uncomfortable. That doesn’t mean I’m being hateful. Personal insults like that are making you look desperate.

I’m not going to respond any more. You can take cheap shots at me and what I’ve lived through. Fine with me. Doesn’t mean that people who took action in 95 to save my life were wrong even though it wasn’t happening to them. Good night.

Uncomfortable? As if you are pricking my conscience or making me question my life choices. No. You are not making me uncomfortable. I just think you are wrong. None of this is about feelings. You have no control over my feelings.