NationStates

Ganonsyoni wrote:

Pantuxia wrote:What?

That words don't have meaning and you are free to say as you please. This ignores the fact that there are consequences to using certain language. Let's use the n-word for example. That word has been used by white people to denigrate black/african americans as subhuman and dates back to when they were in chains. That word has a seriously oppressive charge to it for all black/african americans to this day because of the continuous oppression of their race and is the worse term to call them as it is basically calling them subhuman. if you called a black/african american that, don't expect to get out unscathed.

And no "deal with it" is not an excuse. "Deal with it" implies its the fault of the victim for getting twisted about a word when in fact its the speaker for using such a horribly charged word in the first place.

Word have meaning and words have history. That means words can be oppressive. From the n-word to all other terms used to belittle people for things they cannot control.

So you should censor those who don't agree with you? Or who hurt your feelings? I understand that the word in question has negatives connatations to it, but not only can it be used jokingly, it's also their right as free human beings to say what they want.

Pantuxia wrote:

Ganonsyoni wrote:That words don't have meaning and you are free to say as you please. This ignores the fact that there are consequences to using certain language. Let's use the n-word for example. That word has been used by white people to denigrate black/african americans as subhuman and dates back to when they were in chains. That word has a seriously oppressive charge to it for all black/african americans to this day because of the continuous oppression of their race and is the worse term to call them as it is basically calling them subhuman. if you called a black/african american that, don't expect to get out unscathed.

And no "deal with it" is not an excuse. "Deal with it" implies its the fault of the victim for getting twisted about a word when in fact its the speaker for using such a horribly charged word in the first place.

Word have meaning and words have history. That means words can be oppressive. From the n-word to all other terms used to belittle people for things they cannot control.

So you should censor those who don't agree with you? Or who hurt your feelings? I understand that the word in question has negatives connatations to it, but not only can it be used jokingly, it's also their right as free human beings to say what they want.

Censoring is something the state does so that ideas that seek to overthrow their system (like marxism, communism, anarchism) never spread amongst the populace. Someone telling you to stop using a word because its oppressive is not even in the same league as censorship.

And acting like feelings don't matter is stupid reasoning too. Feelings do matter. When a kid is being bulled and he becomes depressed we stop the bully. But when a black man is being denigrated because of his race, its suddenly a free speech issue for the one doing the denigrating. Feelings are key to a stable society and community. Everyone being angry and contentious with each other because of racial issues is not good cohesion at all. Everyone being happy with each other because of the lack of racial oppression is good for society. And language plays into it.

It's because language matters.

Ganonsyoni wrote:

Pantuxia wrote:So you should censor those who don't agree with you? Or who hurt your feelings? I understand that the word in question has negatives connatations to it, but not only can it be used jokingly, it's also their right as free human beings to say what they want.

Censoring is something the state does so that ideas that seek to overthrow their system (like marxism, communism, anarchism) never spread amongst the populace. Someone telling you to stop using a word because its oppressive is not even in the same league as censorship.

And acting like feelings don't matter is stupid reasoning too. Feelings do matter. When a kid is being bulled and he becomes depressed we stop the bully. But when a black man is being denigrated because of his race, its suddenly a free speech issue for the one doing the denigrating. Feelings are key to a stable society and community. Everyone being angry and contentious with each other because of racial issues is not good cohesion at all. Everyone being happy with each other because of the lack of racial oppression is good for society. And language plays into it.

It's because language matters.

So your argument's justification is "muh feels?"

It's the real world. People aren't nice. You will have to encounter people you disagree with.

Fascism takes the worst parts of the left wing and combines it with the worst parts of the right wing, IMO

Pantuxia wrote:

Ganonsyoni wrote:Censoring is something the state does so that ideas that seek to overthrow their system (like marxism, communism, anarchism) never spread amongst the populace. Someone telling you to stop using a word because its oppressive is not even in the same league as censorship.

And acting like feelings don't matter is stupid reasoning too. Feelings do matter. When a kid is being bulled and he becomes depressed we stop the bully. But when a black man is being denigrated because of his race, its suddenly a free speech issue for the one doing the denigrating. Feelings are key to a stable society and community. Everyone being angry and contentious with each other because of racial issues is not good cohesion at all. Everyone being happy with each other because of the lack of racial oppression is good for society. And language plays into it.

It's because language matters.

So your argument's justification is "muh feels?"

It's the real world. People aren't nice. You will have to encounter people you disagree with.

This "muh feels don't matter" bullshit is entirely an alt-right right wing myth. Emotions do matter. Humans get depressed, angry, sad, and happy and these emotions are reactions to our current conditions. We get depressed form stress of work with no end in sight, angry by the system of exploitation, sad from the loss of comrades, and happy for small victories in the furtherance of our freedom. The same applies to racists/sexist language like the n-word or "pussy". When oppressed people hear or see these word being used, its just a reminder of their own oppression and they react emotionally. To say that feelings don't matter is to say you know nothing about human beings.

People aren't nice because we have to compete for access to needs and resources gated off by capitalists. We are fed lies about race and gender to keep the working class divided and manageable so the capitalists can better exploit us. If the material conditions were change where people aren't oppressed for their class/race/gender and don't have to compete for access to resources, people WOULD be nicer as then people wouldn't have a reason to be mean.

Ganonsyoni wrote:

Pantuxia wrote:So your argument's justification is "muh feels?"

It's the real world. People aren't nice. You will have to encounter people you disagree with.

This "muh feels don't matter" bullshit is entirely an alt-right right wing myth. Emotions do matter. Humans get depressed, angry, sad, and happy and these emotions are reactions to our current conditions. We get depressed form stress of work with no end in sight, angry by the system of exploitation, sad from the loss of comrades, and happy for small victories in the furtherance of our freedom. The same applies to racists/sexist language like the n-word or "pussy". When oppressed people hear or see these word being used, its just a reminder of their own oppression and they react emotionally. To say that feelings don't matter is to say you know nothing about human beings.

People aren't nice because we have to compete for access to needs and resources gated off by capitalists. We are fed lies about race and gender to keep the working class divided and manageable so the capitalists can better exploit us. If the material conditions were change where people aren't oppressed for their class/race/gender and don't have to compete for access to resources, people WOULD be nicer as then people wouldn't have a reason to be mean.

Capitalism has nothing to do with vulgarity, in fact it despises it. Capitalism wants to define what is goodthink and badthink, and you inadvertently contribute to this by suggesting we should punish hate speech.

Pantuxia wrote:

Ganonsyoni wrote:This "muh feels don't matter" bullshit is entirely an alt-right right wing myth. Emotions do matter. Humans get depressed, angry, sad, and happy and these emotions are reactions to our current conditions. We get depressed form stress of work with no end in sight, angry by the system of exploitation, sad from the loss of comrades, and happy for small victories in the furtherance of our freedom. The same applies to racists/sexist language like the n-word or "pussy". When oppressed people hear or see these word being used, its just a reminder of their own oppression and they react emotionally. To say that feelings don't matter is to say you know nothing about human beings.

People aren't nice because we have to compete for access to needs and resources gated off by capitalists. We are fed lies about race and gender to keep the working class divided and manageable so the capitalists can better exploit us. If the material conditions were change where people aren't oppressed for their class/race/gender and don't have to compete for access to resources, people WOULD be nicer as then people wouldn't have a reason to be mean.

Capitalism has nothing to do with vulgarity, in fact it despises it. Capitalism wants to define what is goodthink and badthink, and you inadvertently contribute to this by suggesting we should punish hate speech.

If capitalism despised vulgarity, it wouldn't dump countless billions into the production of it.

Pantuxia wrote:

Ganonsyoni wrote:This "muh feels don't matter" bullshit is entirely an alt-right right wing myth. Emotions do matter. Humans get depressed, angry, sad, and happy and these emotions are reactions to our current conditions. We get depressed form stress of work with no end in sight, angry by the system of exploitation, sad from the loss of comrades, and happy for small victories in the furtherance of our freedom. The same applies to racists/sexist language like the n-word or "pussy". When oppressed people hear or see these word being used, its just a reminder of their own oppression and they react emotionally. To say that feelings don't matter is to say you know nothing about human beings.

People aren't nice because we have to compete for access to needs and resources gated off by capitalists. We are fed lies about race and gender to keep the working class divided and manageable so the capitalists can better exploit us. If the material conditions were change where people aren't oppressed for their class/race/gender and don't have to compete for access to resources, people WOULD be nicer as then people wouldn't have a reason to be mean.

Capitalism has nothing to do with vulgarity, in fact it despises it. Capitalism wants to define what is goodthink and badthink, and you inadvertently contribute to this by suggesting we should punish hate speech.

Capitalism made ass to mouth into a genre...

Isn't clerical fascism oxymoronic? Since fascism is against religion?

Skyviolia wrote:Isn't clerical fascism oxymoronic? Since fascism is against religion?

Not exactly, many fascists are such as a reaction to a percieved threat to traditional values, some see those values as religion.

Skyviolia wrote:Isn't clerical fascism oxymoronic? Since fascism is against religion?

Fascism isn't against religion.

But Mixing it with Clericalism is probably very unorthodox.

I straddle a hard line

I'm a socially liberal(pro gay, pro gun etc etc), but I'm big on nationalism, militarism and even interventionism if needed.

I want a free country that is very nationalist and militaristic

idk if that counts as fascist, from what ive learned Neo-Conservative fits the boat

Nazeroth wrote:I straddle a hard line

I'm a socially liberal(pro gay, pro gun etc etc), but I'm big on nationalism, militarism and even interventionism if needed.

I want a free country that is very nationalist and militaristic

idk if that counts as fascist, from what ive learned Neo-Conservative fits the boat

Well do you want like, a dictator to enforce the social change?

Skyviolia wrote:Isn't clerical fascism oxymoronic? Since fascism is against religion?

Fascism isn't against religion.

"State is not indifferent to religious phenomena in general nor does it maintain an attitude of indifference to Roman Catholicism, the special, positive religion of Italians. The State has not got a theology but it has a moral code. The Fascist State sees in religion one of the deepest of spiritual manifestations and for this reason it not only respects religion but defends and protects it. The Fascist State does not attempt, as did Robespierre at the height of the revolutionary delirium of the Convention, to set up a "god” of its own; nor does it vainly seek, as does Bolshevism, to efface God from the soul of man." - The Doctrine Of Fascism

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

Nazeroth wrote:I straddle a hard line

I'm a socially liberal(pro gay, pro gun etc etc), but I'm big on nationalism, militarism and even interventionism if needed.

I want a free country that is very nationalist and militaristic

idk if that counts as fascist, from what ive learned Neo-Conservative fits the boat

Well do you want like, a dictator to enforce the social change?

well If I was a dictator the only real thing I would want is loyalty and national pride, personal liberty would be in exchange for that.

Nazeroth wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:Well do you want like, a dictator to enforce the social change?

well If I was a dictator the only real thing I would want is loyalty and national pride, personal liberty would be in exchange for that.

Then yeah, I say that's fascist, though I'm no expert. Reminds me of Napoleon almost

National Socialist. I just use Fascism, because all the poll options are different expressions of the same idea.

Pandeeria wrote:

The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster wrote:What exactly is 'sexual deviancy?'

It's an empty buzz word used by fascists, reactionaries, traditionalists, and conservatives for things that make them feel uncomfortable.

Or, it is a useless recreation that can be psychologically erased, and have the mind geared more towards the development of the state, rather than seeking what orifice to fuck next.

Prolix Debate wrote:

Pandeeria wrote:
It's an empty buzz word used by fascists, reactionaries, traditionalists, and conservatives for things that make them feel uncomfortable.

Or, it is a useless recreation that can be psychologically erased, and have the mind geared more towards the development of the state, rather than seeking what orifice to fuck next.

Heh. Good luck with that.

Neanderthaland wrote:

Prolix Debate wrote:
Or, it is a useless recreation that can be psychologically erased, and have the mind geared more towards the development of the state, rather than seeking what orifice to fuck next.

Heh. Good luck with that.

Most societies (e.g. Europe) had good luck with that concept for quite some time; mostly enforced through religious practices transplanted into codes of law.

Of course, nowadays, this "deviancy" has been resurrected and embedded into society because of "social progression".

Prolix Debate wrote:

Pandeeria wrote:
It's an empty buzz word used by fascists, reactionaries, traditionalists, and conservatives for things that make them feel uncomfortable.

Or, it is a useless recreation that can be psychologically erased, and have the mind geared more towards the development of the state, rather than seeking what orifice to fuck next.

Let's destroy what makes us human and reprogram it to make us all little worker bees contributing to something that only exists to stomp on the working class.

Yay, fascism!

Pandeeria wrote:

Prolix Debate wrote:
Or, it is a useless recreation that can be psychologically erased, and have the mind geared more towards the development of the state, rather than seeking what orifice to fuck next.

Let's destroy what makes us human and reprogram it to make us all little worker bees contributing to something that only exists to stomp on the working class.

Yay, fascism!

Do you realize that recreational copulation is not an integral component of society? Unless, of course, you provide some document or article that details how recreational deviancy has shaped human history into the modern day, and not the ambitions of the working class and national identities.

Prolix Debate wrote:

Neanderthaland wrote:Heh. Good luck with that.

Most societies (e.g. Europe) had good luck with that concept for quite some time; mostly enforced through religious practices transplanted into codes of law.

Of course, nowadays, this "deviancy" has been resurrected and embedded into society because of "social progression".

Sure they did.

Not sure why I bother. Fascism has historically been a generating force of sexual deviancy, if anything. I'd be happy to provide citation, alas the pg-13 rule is in effect.

Prolix Debate wrote:

Pandeeria wrote:
Let's destroy what makes us human and reprogram it to make us all little worker bees contributing to something that only exists to stomp on the working class.

Yay, fascism!

Do you realize that recreational copulation is not an integral component of society? Unless, of course, you provide some document or article that details how recreational deviancy has shaped human history into the modern day, and not the ambitions of the working class and national identities.

Shit, do you get out much?

Prolix Debate wrote:

Pandeeria wrote:
Let's destroy what makes us human and reprogram it to make us all little worker bees contributing to something that only exists to stomp on the working class.

Yay, fascism!

Do you realize that recreational copulation is not an integral component of society? Unless, of course, you provide some document or article that details how recreational deviancy has shaped human history into the modern day, and not the ambitions of the working class and national identities.

Sexual desire is one of the most human, personal, and liberating feeling you can experience. It's ridiculous to try and abolish it.