Political correctness Vs Freedom of speech

  • News
  • Thread starter the number 42
  • Start date
In summary: PC?No, I don't think political correctness is the same as being PC. Political correctness is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. PC is the insistence that everyone use language and behave in a way that won't offend certain groups of people. PC can be defined as 'the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s'. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. The declared rational of this tyranny is to prevent people being offended; to
  • #36
SOS2008 said:
Not by choice. I'm adrift in a sea of "red" -- where you can get your thumb on the real pulse of America. To that point and prior comments in other threads about the warm and fuzzy photos of the war in Iraq, I add to this the matter of immense numbers of ribbons on peoples vehicles (read it before you freak): www.commondreams.org/views05/0214-23.htm[/URL]. Just yesterday I saw a vehicle with not one, not two, but FOUR of these things on their car. I've mad the suggestion that a movie be made entitled: "Escape from Jesusland"

Now what was this thread about? :smile:[/QUOTE]

I believe this thread was addresing political correctness versus freedom of speech... :smile:

We have gotten a bit off topic haven't we?

I think if we're going to discuss racism, then we should do it in the White Pride thread...specifically set up to discuss racism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
Yes miskitty, let's get back to your statement
Democracy simply can not flourish in a world with violent restrictions.
.

I think democracy is tougher than that. It has outlasted murderous attacks on free speech like the gunning down of Brann the Iconoclast on the streets of Waco, the murder of the civil rights activists, and for that matter a hundred years of Jum Crow and lynchings. Your quotation of Pax quaetitur bello is apt. Liberty like peace is always an ongoing struggle.
 
  • #38
Yes miskitty, let's get back to your statement
Democracy simply can not flourish in a world with violent restrictions.
.

I think democracy is tougher than that. It has outlasted murderous attacks on free speech like the gunning down of Brann the Iconoclast on the streets of Waco, the murder of the civil rights activists, and for that matter a hundred years of Jim Crow and lynchings. Your quotation of Pax quaetitur bello is apt. Liberty like peace is always an ongoing struggle.
 
  • #39
the number 42 said:
Exactly my point. People say this stuff and mean it, and it shuts the rest of us up because... who can be bothered dealing with trying to explain to a bunch of do-gooder idiots
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system -- Sam Harris' recent book "The End Of Faith"
 
  • #40
SOS2008 said:
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system -- Sam Harris' recent book "The End Of Faith"


Its impossible to cary on a meaningufl dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think for himself, and instead just quotes other people's opinions, as if that person mattered.
 
  • #41
SOS2008 said:
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system

... and dismisses the other's viewpoint a priori. Its easy for both camps to fall into this trap, but at least I'm in the camp that insists that the other person states honestly their position. Its the only way to test propositions, and in the case of those people wanting to ban 'baa baa blacksheep', to test them to destruction.
 
  • #42
franznietzsche said:
Its impossible to cary on a meaningufl dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think for himself, and instead just quotes other people's opinions, as if that person mattered.

Its impossible to carry on in a democracy when one person makes unsubstantiated statements. How many sheep did you hate today, Mr Anti-Shepherd?
 
  • #43
SelfAdjoint, you're right. Democracy is a lot tougher than what I outlined it to be.

Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.
 
  • #44
misskitty said:
SelfAdjoint, you're right. Democracy is a lot tougher than what I outlined it to be.

Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

Whaaat? Nitchy-hates-sheep. Why are you defending him - do you hate sheep too? Just as I thought; this forum is full of sick animal-haters. I don't know why the law allows you to say such things. All it does is encourage the abuse of sheep and upset normal decent people like me.
 
  • #45
misskitty said:
Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
  • #46
misskitty said:
Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

I don't know that I'd go that far. Expert opinions are always more valuable and important than the opinions of a layperson. If I wanted to design a piping array for an irrigation system, I'd ask my dad. If I wanted advice on how best to handle a medium sized group of preteen girls, I'd ask my mom. They each have their own specialty.

That's another thing I've never liked about the PC crowd - that sense of entitlement that leads people to believe that their opinions are necessarily worthwhile and mean something. I'm no including anyone that's posted so far in this thread, but there are plenty around here that post nothing but mindless drivel and hate-mongering.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

I don't think they're being entirely serious.
 
  • #47
loseyourname said:
I don't know that I'd go that far. Expert opinions are always more valuable and important than the opinions of a layperson. If I wanted to design a piping array for an irrigation system, I'd ask my dad. If I wanted advice on how best to handle a medium sized group of preteen girls, I'd ask my mom. They each have their own specialty.

But i thought all people were created equal, how could one person possibly be better at something than another. The union isn't going to like that...oh, wait. I'm not liberal. I forget so easily sometimes.

That's another thing I've never liked about the PC crowd - that sense of entitlement that leads people to believe that their opinions are necessarily worthwhile and mean something. I'm no including anyone that's posted so far in this thread, but there are plenty around here that post nothing but mindless drivel and hate-mongering.

Rule of thumb: If you think your opinion means anything, it definitely does not.

If you know that your opinion means absolutely nothing to anyone but yourself, congratulations, you've stepped above the intellectual level of overly chewed gum.

My opinion means absolutley nothing, in objective terms, and that's a fact. And i know it.

I don't think they're being entirely serious.


Us? Serious? Deadly.
 
  • #48
I need a fire extinguisher to put out the flames in this thread.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top