gnusty_gnurc

So when MSNBC pioneered the idea of an illegitimate election, and spent 4 years haranguing and indulging in massive conspiracy theories about it, that's not hazardous?

And it's not hazardous when the Washington Post removes an unflattering story about Kamala laughing about prisoners begging for water?

> Unless something is done about this (and they make some suggestions on what to do), the future does not look great.

Doomsday predictions haven't panned out so far.

interesting, entertaining the stuff around USO lore though, wouldn't the energy required to navigate around the bottom of the ocean be immense though (more than whatever you calculated)?

> as the innocent victim of a liberal conspiracy

It's fair to say that tech is majority liberal and it'd be simply dumb to contradict liberal orthodoxy to say unconscious bias doesn't exist.

So it's certainly fair to say that tech has an unconscious liberal bias and their actions are going to be harmful towards conservatives.

People say this but the obvious point is that flu numbers are much lower if not vanishingly small, suggesting people are in fact largely complying with mitigation efforts.

So the only argument I see otherwise is that there's some radical difference in the R number between the viruses such that masks only lower substantially enough for flu and not SARS-CoV-2. But that's a much more specific argument that I don't see being argued much less substantiated and proven.

I had socialist/communist/anarchist friends throughout college talk about the need to use guillotines.

> That is, "speech is violent speech IFF it disturbs the peace."

Disturbing peace? Isn’t that very much under the scope of the BLM associated rioting?

Like we’re talking many buildings public and otherwise burned to the ground. Billions of dollars of damage.

Precisely demonstrating my point: a hyper-sensitivity and censorious attitude against any advocacy for unmitigated debate.

> Give the students as many perspectives and hope that they will do something sensible as they process the information

I don’t know if you’ve gone to college recently but that was not my impression. It’s a woke monoculture. Discourse is gone.

Seems like the whole “you have to bake my cake” argument went out the window. Do I have to feed the enemy?

All these platforms are literally dopamine gerbil wheels enslaving humanity to screens.

Stop pretending these are the progressive vanguards of society.

It’s not uncharitable to state there’s ethnic cleansing occurring in China and the state has codified race supremacy.

It’s pretty clear tech companies have figured out you don’t have to pay your employees more, pandering to them gives them much more.

It doesn’t seem like the left values discourse. I don’t know if they care to respond to market incentive if that’s what you’re suggesting.

This has been apparent for some time and is a complete reversal from when conservatives were the conformist squares policing speech and society broadly.

You would think it’d be obvious to “hackers” that consolidation of power over information channels is the real coup.

Sad no one seems alarmed by that or understands how that can go wrong.

> we take whatever measures we have to to get rid of it for the greater good of society

Justifying around the "greater good" is so obviously fraught and subjective.

And since the workers in tech are overwhelmingly liberal, they will undoubtedly bias policies of mass communication platforms to disallow opposition.

Oddly enough people so concerned with minority representation will steam-roll minorities when they make blind "greater good" majoritarianism the norm.

And nowadays the definition of "harm" has been trivialized so far that really practically anything is a target.

So when Cathy Griffin held up a beheaded Trump in effigy - should we have imprisoned her? I don't remember many people policing her "incitement to violence."

> The hope is that these people will commit more violence so that the government can use the violence as an excuse to criminalize their existence

honestly the government is always happy for reasons to broaden their power to surveil

> They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence.

"in defense of looting"

And while I'm at it - why isn't China being deplatformed?

They literally just posted on their embassy twitter account saying they fixed minority women who were "baby-making machines."

One can only guess they mean sterilization.

It's obvious who's allowed to be inhumane and who isn't.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/chinese-embassy-tweet-u...

I guess I see the issue as almost impossible to solve since they're all politicians unable to engage in reasonable discussion, especially when it was election season.

> They control these institutions and they want to make damn sure Donald Trump never happens again.

Oddly enough Trump was all but a symptom of a system that's completely hollowed out and unable to work for the Trump crowd.

Not only does the system not work for Trump ppl - it effectively represents no one.

So you end up with this pathetic ping-pong between major parties, trying to declaring their "mandate" after each election. The truth is that a sliver of swing voters is switching between absolute fools and empty suits.

Biden is The System incarnate - he created the void that was begging for Trump and it'll be interesting to see what happens next.

Instead of trying to understand how the Trump crowd is ailing and respond to their requests for help and recognition no matter how distorted and seemingly vulgar/uncivilized/etc., we had 4 years of hysteric catastrophizing, outright conspiracy theories(like Russia-gate) and obstruction.

Let's remind everyone that Hillary participated in the whole "switch the electors", "he's an illegitimate president" talk.

> On Jan. 31, President Trump issued the travel restrictions from China. One day after the travel restrictions were put into place, Biden said in Iowa, “We have, right now, a crisis with the coronavirus… This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria and xenophobia – hysterical xenophobia – and fearmongering to lead the way instead of science.”

> Biden added, repeating a line from his USA Today oped: “Diseases have no borders, they have no borders.”

> The same day, Biden Tweeted similarly, “A wall will not stop the coronavirus. Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it…”

https://www.cerescourier.com/opinion/editorial/biden-flips-c...

All Biden's statements are suffused with reminders of the idiotic things Trump is associated with even when it serves no purpose in context of a pandemic. "Diseases have no borders"?

He was looking for opportunities to bring up campaign lines.

At the end of the day, the narrative switched completely where before established health knowledge recognized NPIs outside of social distancing as largely ineffective.

I don't know I just feel like there's a weird 180 backlash across the spectrum.

Where Trump was continuously treated as a dictator but then his opposition is openly admiring China for their authoritarianism in combating coronavirus.

Likewise his border wall efforts were always stymied cause they were "racist."

That could very well be true but with such sweeping generalizations the political support for border control re: coronavirus isn't really there since everyone's staked their position based on opposing their own enemies.

You're ignoring that his opposition immediately yelled racism when he was taking steps like shutting down flights, etc.

Nancy Pelosi was encouraging everyone to go to Chinatown when the virus was beginning to spread. In retrospect it's obvious how pretentious and unhelpful that was.

I'm just pointing out that politically the issue is tough given the stances people staked their identities on.

> My point here is the scope of things

My point is the scope of things too.

There was complete chaos across the country last year.

With many reminiscent if not worse scenes of complete disregard for public spaces and institutions.

The media was practically giddy about justifications of why we shouldn't be opposing the destruction of statues of the founding fathers. Freaking abolitionist statues were targeted.

There is unquestionably more total damage, building burned to the ground, etc from what happened last year.

I'm not saying what occurred at the Capitol is to be dismissed - quite the contrary. What I'm saying is that it's like one half of the country just woke up to the idea that mass political violence and bedlam should be denounced.

> I don't understand why we couldn't have closed the borders

This was literally the most opposed aspect of Trump's presidency.

I suspect one element that hasn't been touched by Democrats is admitting that absolute control of the border is something they want but would look like complete hypocrites admitting.

> Five people died as a result of these actions.

I can guarantee more died as a direct result of BLM "protests" in 2020.

Nevermind billions of dollars of damage that fell on the shoulders of minority and lower class communities.

I have a hard time imagining that someone concerned about insurrection would unabashedly gloss over CHAZ/CHOP as though it's not a cut-and-dry act of secession.

I guess you support secession.

It's clear that liberals(and never-trump conservatives) don't know how to effectively deal with Trump supporters.

Censoring(or moderating if that's what you're going to argue it's called) will only make things worse, it will polarize things even further.

The way to address Trump supporters is to listen to them.

Suppress whatever biased lower-level consciousness that's going to hijack your thought process and demonize them.

Observe what is driving their anger and actually help them.

You cannot stomp out this many people who have very real concerns that need to be addressed. And the effective solution will not be the thing that confirms all your priors.

> People died anyway.

Same happened at CHAZ, a couple black kids got killed by some nutjob police LARPers.

I don’t recall a big hubbub blaming left wing rhetoric or arguing for the immediate destruction and disbanding of the autonomous zones. I remember an absolute heartbreaking interview with the kid’s father.

There was no interest for the BLM crowd to hold their own accountable.

Let’s consider that your perception is fallible and possibly wrong. And hypothetically assume your concept of “the oppressed” is off to some degree.

You’ve admitted to justifying and even supporting riots on the “left.” And that sets the stage for rioting on the “right.”

Political violence begets political violence and you’re (knowingly or not) supporting the dissolution of civil society.