Reply to Stoicism and Jordan Peterson popularity with young men

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Stoicism and Jordan Peterson popularity with young men"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]His opinion should not be allowed.[/quote]

This is exactly the problem with Leftists. Can't handle differing opinions and so they must be cancelled. Grow up[/quote]

This is a massive problem for the left. If you don’t like what Jordan Peterson says, don’t listen.[/quote]

Really?

Read this and then tell us if you still agree:

https://humanevents.com/2021/09/28/nearly-25-of-college-students-say-its-acceptable-to-use-violence-to-shut-down-controversial-speakers/[/quote]

NP.  I’m not sure I understand your point with this article.  Doesn’t that just confirm what pp said about people on the left not being able to handle hearing opposing viewpoints?[/quote]

Right? How is it acceptable to use violence to shut down opposing views? I know there is a movement on the left to broadly ban hate speech because the argument is that words can actually cause physical harm, but that comes directly into collision with the first amendment. All it indicates to me is the left is becoming increasingly intolerant and enraptured with safe spaces and so forth. If you want to see how that whole thing played out, historically, look to countries that had mass purges and genocides. This is America friends. We can say what the fk we want here. Sorry you’re offended.[/quote]

What are you talking about with "broadly banning hate speech?"

Countries that had mass purges and genocides didn't go through that because they restricted hate speech. They had a problem because they let hate speech flourish. Compare democratic Germany's hate speech rules with  the hate speech of Nazi Germany.

But the heart of the issue is that violent ideas should not be allowed to go unchecked and sometimes they really shouldn't have a platform. Like, you should not put a flat-earther on a show and just let them spout off their BS. That gives their ideas legitimacy. It's the same with people who have violent ideas. If you have a neo-nazi given the same platform as a Jewish person, you're giving the neo-nazi credibility that is dangerous. I don't think you should suppress opinions you disagree with, but it is fine to suppress opinions that are both wrong and dangerous, like "women should be beaten if they refuse to have sex with you." (And I have heard somebody on a podcast say that and the interviewer responded like "huh, weird, moving on.") [/quote]

What I’m talking about is the kind of speech policing the left is doing to sentences like “America is a melting pot” or “being punctual is racist”….there is this massive shift, employing post-modern philosophy on anti-racism, to squelch common speech. Like how the fk is it racist to say America is a melting pot? I understand in academic professors are now deathly afraid of saying the wrong thing, or anything too edgy, for fear of retribution from school administrators. This is for literally doing things like pronouncing a common Chinese word in class that offended some students: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/09/08/professor-suspended-saying-chinese-word-sounds-english-slur

Or questioning a Coca Cola presentation that said “be less white.”

Basically the left is trying to reinvent speech but put Nerf like protections on things that aren’t offensive. People are tired of this pc acolytes.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics