F Champ Receives Lifetime Ban, Racism in the FGC/USA, and Other Prevalent Social Discussions

[sub_on_dubs]

At comedy shows? Wouldn't that represent a good time for those kinds of things?

Snowflakes still being snowflakes I see. In the 90's, there were no limits to what you could say as a comedian because everybody knew it was just entertainment in the end and nobody meant any ill will by it. You could say racial, rape, and misogynistic jokes and nobody took it seriously because everybody knew it was all in fun.

Really, there's only a few comedians that have no limits when it comes to their comedy and that's Chappelle, Burr, and Joey Diaz and I think even they need to push it further like comedy used to be.

Now a small and very loud minority of people are trying to tell everybody else how we should feel about certain issues.

For people that love the first amendment, you really need to start to stand up to these bullies and be more vocal or we're going to continue to walk on egg shells trying to appease these coddled little brats who have never had to deal with adversity in their life. Let's all make them run to their safe spaces so they never want to leave them.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

Snowflakes still being snowflakes I see. In the 90's, there were no limits to what you could say as a comedian because everybody knew it was just entertainment in the end and nobody meant any ill will by it. You could say racial, rape, and misogynistic jokes and nobody took it seriously because everybody knew it was all in fun.

Really, there's only a few comedians that have no limits when it comes to their comedy and that's Chappelle, Burr, and Joey Diaz and I think even they need to push it further like comedy used to be.

Now a small and very loud minority of people are trying to tell everybody else how we should feel about certain issues.

For people that love the first amendment, you really need to start to stand up to these bullies and be more vocal or we're going to continue to walk on egg shells trying to appease these coddled little brats who have never had to deal with adversity in their life. Let's all make them run to their safe spaces so they never want to leave them.

This coming from the guy who blocked me because he couldn't stand being wrong.

You want to bully someone? Bully me, Skinhead Trump Jr. Please. Make me run to my safe space. I BEG of you. Either that or you can keep that keyboard warriors intimidation bullshit on Breitbart and the dead Nazi subreddits. But don't sit here encouraging people to "fight back" when you avoid me like the plague on a regular basis, because I will shame you out of your shoes with a smile on my face.

Edit: I'm pretty sure he still has me blocked for fear of the truth of his own blissful ignorance, so anyone who feels like I do is welcome to quote this and tag him in it so he gets the point. This is a place for debate and discussion, not shameless bigots trying to sow further discord into an already volatile topic for their own entertainment so they can hide in Free Speech Protective Custody and pretend they're the ones being persecuted.

 

[Cobainevermind87]

You could say racial, rape, and misogynistic jokes and nobody took it seriously because everybody knew it was all in fun.

Ah yes, who doesn't love a good rape joke?

Fuckin liberal snowflakes I tell you.
/s

 

[NaCl man]

FgC Champ is kid diddler? Who knew.

Given the thread title is about Ryan and not about the other things going on, I’m not sure why you’re trying to suggest that I’m saying we should progressively suspend pedos. Obvioisly, some things are so bad that all is warranted. A racially insensitive post isn’t one of them.

A one year suspension gets the point across that the behavior is unacceptable and gives the opportunity for someone to correct the behavior. If they do it again then levy a harder penalty, and if it continues THEN permaban them.

This is how other sports leagues approach discipline. When they’ve gone against that rule they risk looking foolish because they levy harsh punishments inconsistently.

(NFL and domestic violence come to mind)

No fchamp has not been accused of the abuse of children. He made a racial comment on twitter in reference to watermelon. Which after some research i learnt is very inappropriate.
It was Mr Wizard who runs evo and some of the smash community who have been accused and some of them including Mr wizard have admitted to it.
I thought that should be cleared up.

 

[NaCl man]

This coming from the guy who blocked me because he couldn't stand being wrong.

You want to bully someone? Bully me, Skinhead Trump Jr. Please. Make me run to my safe space. I BEG of you. Either that or you can keep that keyboard warriors intimidation bullshit on Breitbart and the dead Nazi subreddits. But don't sit here encouraging people to "fight back" when you avoid me like the plague on a regular basis, because I will shame you out of your shoes with a smile on my face.

Edit: I'm pretty sure he still has me blocked for fear of the truth of his own blissful ignorance, so anyone who feels like I do is welcome to quote this and tag him in it so he gets the point. This is a place for debate and discussion, not shameless bigots trying to sow further discord into an already volatile topic for their own entertainment so they can hide in Free Speech Protective Custody and pretend they're the ones being persecuted.

With all due respect calling somebody a skinhead trump Jr and insinuating he belongs to nazi sub redits is hardly promoting debate and discussion.

Calling people snowflakes certainly doesn't help either.

This is starting to get out of hand now.
I personally have learnt a lot from this thread about the history of America and why certain things that have been said are out of line and I appreciate that.

But nobody gets anything out of attacks it just makes people turn off.

We don't all have to agree on everything but if we seriously want to grow as humans the bullshit attacks on each other's opinions has to stop.

I know it is an emotional discussion but let's show each other a bit more respect please.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

With all due respect calling somebody a skinhead trump Jr and insinuating he belongs to nazi sub redits is hardly promoting debate and discussion.

Calling people snowflakes certainly doesn't help either.

This is starting to get out of hand now.
I personally have learnt a lot from this thread about the history of America and why certain things that have been said are out of line and I appreciate that.

But nobody gets anything out of attacks it just makes people turn off.

We don't all have to agree on everything but if we seriously want to grow as humans the bullshit attacks on each other's opinions has to stop.

I know it is an emotional discussion but let's show each other a bit more respect please.

Oh, that wasn't out of nowhere. He has a foul and storied history here, and absolutely has it coming. Ask around.

And also, there are certain people in this world who literally only learn from being attacked back. Any person I've ever disagreed with, I always implore them to prove me wrong or tell me their side, and I'm very much in favor of forgive and move forward when people are willing to sincerely walk back questionable actions. But sometimes, people come along with no purpose in mind but to start fires and fan the flames, and they require dealing with. 98% of the time, meeting in the middle is the right way to go. This is not one of those times.

 

[ChaosTheory]

Ah yes, who doesn't love a good rape joke?

Fuckin liberal snowflakes I tell you.
/s

I remember seeing this in college and it stuck with me.

You might not think it's funny, you like what you like. But a lot of people can find humor and release in otherwise dark subject matter. The audience certainly had a reaction.

 

[Dankster Morgan]

I remember seeing this in college and it stuck with me.

You might not think it's funny, you like what you like. But a lot of people can find humor and release in otherwise dark subject matter. The audience certainly had a reaction.

RIP Patrice, I'm going to shamelessly tie this back into my earlier conversations about deaths happening too soon due to obesity related conditions. In Patrice's case, that would be obesity into type 2 diabetes, into a stroke. Humor is subjective but love yourselves enough to take care of yourself.

 

[Living Corpse]

Get all this nasty shit off my FGC block, man.

The anime community to. As an anime fan it's shocking to me how many are racist and xenophobic. Like irony much?

 

[Living Corpse]

Ah yes, who doesn't love a good rape joke?

Fuckin liberal snowflakes I tell you.
/s

I can't remember who it was but there was a comedian who made a rape joke that made it seem like it was dismissing it as women making a bigger deal out of it than it actually was, but then the punch line is we learn it was from the prescriptive of a man who was raped in prison and trying to downplay how traumatic it is for women so he doesn't have to admit it traumatized him.

In a weird way it was making a point or social commentary on how people who downplay it don't know how bad it is till it happens to them.

 

[Dankster Morgan]

I can't remember who it was but there was a comedian who made a rape joke that made it seem like it was dismissing it as women making a bigger deal out of it than it actually was, but then the punch line is we learn it was from the prescriptive of a man who was raped in prison and trying to downplay how traumatic it is for women so he doesn't have to admit it traumatized him.

In a weird way it was making a point or social commentary on how people who downplay it don't know how bad it is till it happens to them.

To be honest, most people don't like rape jokes. However, rape of men is casually thrown around and used for laughs. Don't drop the soap jokes and shit like that, in a DC animated movie (haven't watched, can't confirm), Harley basically rapes Nightwing, which the opposite sounds impossible to ever put out there.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Guys, I don't honestly think that this the time or the place.

 

[Living Corpse]

To be honest, most people don't like rape jokes. However, rape of men is casually thrown around and used for laughs. Don't drop the soap jokes and shit like that, in a DC animated movie (haven't watched, can't confirm), Harley basically rapes Nightwing, which the opposite sounds impossible to ever put out there.

Right and normally I don't either unless it's at the expense of the rapist or people who dismiss it, not the victims, but the point was this guy was making a point about how much in denial people are about it, pretending it doesn't happen or isn't a big deal. Basically trying to get people to seriously stop and think about a mentality that is very, VERY wrong with society that needs to be changed and disguised it as a joke cause, well, it's something that needs to be talked about but you don't just drop it out of no where in a casual conversation.

Part of comedy and horror is bringing up problems that need to be acknowledged and fixed.

 

[Dankster Morgan]

Right and normally I don't either unless it's at the expense of the rapist or people who dismiss it, not the victims, but the point was this guy was making a point about how much in denial people are about it, pretending it doesn't happen or isn't a big deal. Basically trying to get people to seriously stop and think about a mentality that is very, VERY wrong with society that needs to be changed and disguised it as a joke cause, well, it's something that needs to be talked about but you don't just drop it out of no where in a casual conversation.

Part of comedy and horror is bringing up problems that need to be acknowledged and fixed.

Yes, I agree, smart people can go about subjects like that in ways that are still respectful, usually better to not go there imo but I am not a talented comedian like Dave Chappelle who can tackle just about anything. Humor is a coping mechanism and some people are gifted in that they can effectively talk about anything using it.

 

[M2Dave]

Freedom of speech has never meant freedom from consequences. This seems to be highly misunderstood.

Not only ought Americans support freedom of speech, they also ought to support freedom from consequences, which already have a legal definition - violation of the rule of law. Shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theater induces panic and has therefore nothing to do with the concept of freedom of speech. I am referring to citizens exercising free speech in a legal fashion that is in no way, shape, or form connected to their church, employer, school, or any other institution. I will skip talking about the obvious totalitarianism of the woke mob on Twitter in order to provide examples of consequences that most people on this website will find disturbing.

I think everyone is familiar with the story of Colin Kaepernick at this point. Before a football game a couple of years ago, he knelt during the national anthem to protest police brutality. President Trump suggested that NFL owners fire any players who kneel during the national anthem. While Kaepernick was never fired, his contract with the San Fransisco 49ers ran out. If I am not mistaken, he has been a free agent since the 2016 season. He has filed grievances against the NFL. The point is that he exercised free speech yet is facing the consequence of being unemployed. Of course, Kaepernick has earned millions of dollars so he is going to be all right. On the other hand, if a middle-class person were fired for exercising free speech, he or she could be ruined financially, particularly during the pandemic.

Katie Hill, who was the democratic U.S. Representative for California's 25th Congressional District, was forced to resign after a conservative blog leaked photos of an extramarital affair with male and female staffers. If the sex was consensual, between adults, and on private property, who cares? Why should she lose be forced to resign? Why should there be a consequence?

The reality is that the consequences that you preach are almost always political persecutions as well as character assassinations on both sides of the political spectrum.

 

[Swindle]

The anime community to. As an anime fan it's shocking to me how many are racist and xenophobic. Like irony much?

An absurd amount of anime tends to sexualize underage girls, glorify non-consensual sex/rape scenarios, and have of-age female characters act like children for the sexual pleasure of male characters.
Nothing about anime or it’s fans shock me.

 

[Espio]

Not only ought Americans support freedom of speech, they also ought to support freedom from consequences, which already have a legal definition - violation of the rule of law. Shouting "fire" in a crowded movie theater induces panic and has therefore nothing to do with the concept of freedom of speech. I am referring to citizens exercising free speech in a legal fashion that is in no way, shape, or form connected to their church, employer, school, or any other institution. I will skip talking about the obvious totalitarianism of the woke mob on Twitter in order to provide examples of consequences that most people on this website will find disturbing.

I think everyone is familiar with the story of Colin Kaepernick at this point. Before a football game a couple of years ago, he knelt during the national anthem to protest police brutality. President Trump suggested that NFL owners fire any players who kneel during the national anthem. While Kaepernick was never fired, his contract with the San Fransisco 49ers ran out. If I am not mistaken, he has been a free agent since the 2016 season. He has filed grievances against the NFL. The point is that he exercised free speech yet is facing the consequence of being unemployed. Of course, Kaepernick has earned millions of dollars so he is going to be all right. On the other hand, if a middle-class person were fired for exercising free speech, he or she could be ruined financially, particularly during the pandemic.

Katie Hill, who was the democratic U.S. Representative for California's 25th Congressional District, was forced to resign after a conservative blog leaked photos of an extramarital affair with male and female staffers. If the sex was consensual, between adults, and on private property, who cares? Why should she lose be forced to resign? Why should there be a consequence?

The reality is that the consequences that you preach are almost always political persecutions as well as character assassinations on both sides of the political spectrum.

Just being honest, but I don't address topics that have nothing to do with what I said so Trump involving himself in citizens protesting (has nothing to do with what I support) so I won't be entertaining it or distracting myself with it. You should direct your criticism of Trump involving himself in such matters with his supporters or at the ballot box.

Yelling fire in a theater has been argued as free speech before which is why the Supreme Court articulated their thoughts on the matter to illustrate that freedom of speech is not unlimited. You don't get to change the meaning of things because you don't agree with them. If you think the opinion is wrong that's cool.


I don't preach anything and I'm not interested in the dogma or the rhetorical games. Being against racism, sexism, homophobia etc are not political statements (everyone should be against treating people differently based on who they are or how they were born).

Other people's rights, safety or security should never be up for debate. I'm concerned with humanity and how we are treated, I care very little for politicians, woke twitter or any other matters. People don't get canceled that treat people equally.

There's been too much talking in my post already, but since you decided to quote me I'm getting to the point finally. Do you think people who are racist should have consequences for doing so related to work or do you think they should be able to say whatever they want at work? I will take yes or no, not all these stories about corrupt politicians or things I'm not arguing.

 

[NaCl man]

Yelling "fire" in a theatre is al call to action and would only be tolerated if there was a fire.

 

[jokey77]

A few pages ago I said that I am somewhat afraid of this left-wing rhetoric and especially cancel culture. That was for three reasons:

1.) I expect it to lead to a more polarized society.
2.) I expect it to establish double-standards.
3.) The fighting rhetoric starts with clear cases (FChamp, that socially awkward EVO-dude) before the very same phrases (e.g. calling someone a racist) are used to ban even moderate dissenters from speaking. This will trivialize discourse in a dangerous way.

I can give examples for all of these effects, just looking at this very thread: E.g. appearently @Skedar70 (who I don't agree with) got banned, while others were using phrases like "Fuck off" (which I consider a lot more misplaced) unpunished. People like @M2Dave (!) got called "racists". I mean for real? That dude is polite, factual and obviously intelligent. Also I have no idea what @SaSSolino did, to deserve getting attacked the way he did.

I also become more and more reluctant with my posts, even though I would propably still consider myself "Pro-BLM". Yet I do start to doubt said viewpoint, because the witch-hunting rhetoric strikes me as the even greater evil. If the "BLM-movement" is what I am seeing in this thread, then I'd say it does more harm than good. However I still hope that it is possible to disconnect the unreflected fighting rhetoric from the objectively justified concerns. Besides I don't want to fall for people like Trump, who try to lump all BLM-protesters together.

Some of you are on the best way to get rid of opposing views. Not because they don't exist, but because they see no point in discourse with you. This is how the so-called "bubbles", that exist on both sides of the politcal spectrum, emerge.

I am surprised that you don't see the major risk of "going over the top". Your goal should be to convince the people "in the middle". The applause from like-minded people won't win you the election. For moderate dissidents the witch-hunting rhetoric can be quite deterrent though.

At least this is true, for as long as you want to work with conviction and not with intimidation. In the latter case I have to add, that the violent elimination of opinions is rather an attribute of fascist societies. Yet cancel culture is all about intimidation.

 

[Marlow]

At comedy shows? Wouldn't that represent a good time for those kinds of things?

If someone's using it to make a point, or help themselves and others work through some issues, or something like that, then sure.

If someone is just being lazy and using racist/sexist jokes just to cause outrage, or to make light about something that doesn't really impact them or their core audience at all? Then it's probably inappropriate.

 

[Deleted member 5032]

Some of you are on the best way to get rid of opposing views. Not because they don't exist, but because they see no point in discourse with you. This is how the so-called "bubbles", that exist on both sides of the politcal spectrum, emerge.

I am surprised that you don't see the major risk of "going over the top". Your goal should be to convince the people "in the middle". The applause from like-minded people won't win you the election. For moderate dissidents the witch-hunting rhetoric can be quite deterrent though.

No one in this thread is going to convince anyone of anything. No one is here to listen or learn; everyone is here to spout their own ideals. I've been tempted to post my own thoughts, but it's a waste of time. Just look at the ratio of statements to questions (not counting questions intended to prove one's own point or to discredit one's opponent). You can post facts and articles all day long, but for every article you post, your opponent has 10 they can post, and no one has the time to read through and validate the credibility of that much information. If you're a flat earther, anti-vaxxer, or any other anti-science nut-job, you can still find hundreds of "articles" to share to back up your arguments. It's an absolute waste of time trying to prove your point to someone who doesn't want that point proven.

So, with that said, I just wanted to address your comment about how this is "left-wing rhetoric". It's not, it just happens that most of the outspoken members of TYM happen to be left-leaning. Although these subjects are highly volatile and always result in highly-emotional posts, most of the arguments are at least in good faith; I don't see much intentional misunderstandings of arguments, twisting of words, or intentional posting of blatant misinformation. If you want truly dangerous rhetoric, let's look at the strategy for conservative bloggers as outline by Karl Rove:

Spoiler

Engage
Demand an elaborate, time-consuming comparison / analysis between your position and theirs.
Entangle
Insist that the Liberal put their posts in their own words. That will consume the most time and effort for the Liberal poster.
They will be unable to spread numerous points on numerous blogs if you have them occupied. Allowing a Liberal to post a web link is too quick and efficient for them. Tie them up. We are going for delay of game here.
Demoralize
Dismiss their narrative as rubbish immediately.
Do not even read it. Once the Liberal goes through the trouble to research, gather, collate, compose and write their narrative your job is to discredit it. Make it obvious you tossed their labor-intensive narrative aside like garbage. This will have the effect of demoralizing the Liberal poster.
It will make them unwilling to expend the effort again, and for us, that is a net win.
Attack
Attack the source. Any Liberal website or information source must be marginalized, trivialized and discounted. Let the blogosphere know that Truthout.org, thinkprogress.org, the nation and moveon.org are Liberal rubbish propaganda. Discredit Liberal sources of information whenever possible.
Confuse
Challenge the Liberal position with questions, always questions. The questions need not be relevant. The goal is to knock the Liberal poster off their game, and seize control of the narrative.
Once you have control you can direct the narrative to where you want it to go, which is always away from letting the Liberal make their point. Conversely, do not respond to their leading questions. Don't rise to their bait.
Contain
Your job is to prevent the presentation and spread of Liberal viewpoints.
Do anything you must do to prevent a Liberal poster from presenting a well-reasoned argument or starting a civil discussion.
Don't allow a Liberal to present their dogma unchallenged EVER.
Intimidate
Taunt the Liberals. If you find yourself in a debate with a Liberal where you are losing a fact-based argument then call them a name to derail their diatribe. Remember your goal is to prevent a meaningful exchange of views and ideas which may portray Liberalism in a positive light.
Your goal as a conservative blogger is to stop the spread and advance of the Liberal agenda. Play upon any identifiable idiosyncrasies, character flaws, physical traits, names, to their disadvantage. Monitor other posts for vulnerabilities you can exploit. Stay on the offensive with Liberal wimps. Don't let up.
Insult their Movement
Assign as many character and moral flaws to Liberals as you can. You must portray Liberals as weak, vacillating, indecisive, amoral, baby killers, unpatriotic, effete snobs, elitists, Leftists, Commies, sense of entitlement, promiscuous, union lovers, tax raisers, Welfare Queens, Socialists, lazy, sex-obsessed, druggies, Jesus haters, moochers, troop hater,.etc. Always use these negative epithets when referring to, or describing Liberals / democrats.
Deceive
Identify yourself as a moderate, centrist or independent. It will also cause Liberals to lower their guard a bit, which gives you an effective opening. This may also have the effect of aligning conservative viewpoints with the real moderates we are attempting to reach.
It may serve to influence some moderates over to the Republican side.
Patriotism
Always claim the high ground of pro-military, low taxes, strong defense, morality and religion. We own those virtues. Learn how to exploit them when debating.
Demean
Always refer to the other side as Liberals, Lefty Liberals, Libbies. Never assign them the status of a bona-fide political party. Hang Liberalism around their neck like a burning tire. Make Liberalism appear as a moral turpitude or a character flaw. They are NEVER, NEVER to be referred to as the Democratic Party. At best it is the democrat party. Never assign them respect.
Opportunity
Be alert for ways to insert our catch phrases into your narrative. You will receive your daily list of talking points and topics that we want you to cover. Consistent, persistent repetition and inculcation will drive our talking points home and so will neuro-linguistic programming. Stick with it and our talking points will become truth. If they debunk your talking point, ignore it, and move on as if you didn't hear it.

Look at any online politcal argument and you'll see those tactics being used. And one more good example:

Spoiler

"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past."
Jean-Paul Sartre, talking about the futility of engaging in discourse with fascists/racists.

I felt that an example of truly "dangerous" rhetoric was necessary because most of what we're seeing in this thread is just typical disagreements between opposite viewpoints. It's gotten heated, for sure, but let's not confuse heated arguments with truly disingenous and weaponized discourse. But now I must go. Somewhere, there is a crime happening.

 

[Marlow]

Snowflakes still being snowflakes I see. In the 90's, there were no limits to what you could say as a comedian because everybody knew it was just entertainment in the end and nobody meant any ill will by it. You could say racial, rape, and misogynistic jokes and nobody took it seriously because everybody knew it was all in fun.

Everybody except people who were actual victims of racism, rape, and misogyny.

I'm not going to say people should never tell jokes about those subjects. Humor can be a perfectly fine way to heal or cope with issues, or to try and bring issues to light. As I've always said, context matters. But when these subjects are treated so lightly, it also gives people an excuse to ignore issues, or write them off as non-existent. Or to keep harboring harmful and hurtful views. If I've never experienced these things, and I can just joke about these things, why should I feel like they're big enough social issues that actually need to be addressed?

I'm white, and grew up in the 90's in a Wisconsin small town that's almost 90% white. Or at the very least it felt that way. So I've never really experienced racism. Not towards me, and not towards anyone I know. I'm fortunate enough to have that privilege. My only reference points are what I learned in school, and what I consume from media. So when I see a comedy sketch about a black man being harassed by a police officer due to the color of his skin, it's pretty easy for me to laugh it off as being harmless comedy, because certainly that kind of racism doesn't actually still exist, does it? Except now it's 2020 and minorities are still being killed by police during what should be routine stops.

I think it's perfectly fine that as a society we're trying hold ourselves to a higher standard, and actually asking ourselves how harmless some of these things really are. Again, it doesn't mean all offensive comedy should be banned, but let's be better about things.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Regarldless, NOW IS NOT THE TIME.

Have some sensitivity. Look at what came to light in the last week. A lot of people are dealing with real pain right now, and there are lives that as a result of some of these things have never been the same.

If you want to joke about/make fun of this stuff, this just isn't the time and place for it.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

A few pages ago I said that I am somewhat afraid of this left-wing rhetoric and especially cancel culture. That was for three reasons:

1.) I expect it to lead to a more polarized society.
2.) I expect it to establish double-standards.
3.) The fighting rhetoric starts with clear cases (FChamp, that socially awkward EVO-dude) before the very same phrases (e.g. calling someone a racist) are used to ban even moderate dissenters from speaking. This will trivialize discourse in a dangerous way.

I can give examples for all of these effects, just looking at this very thread: E.g. appearently @Skedar70 (who I don't agree with) got banned, while others were using phrases like "Fuck off" (which I consider a lot more misplaced) unpunished. People like @M2Dave (!) got called "racists". I mean for real? That dude is polite, factual and obviously intelligent. Also I have no idea what @SaSSolino did, to deserve getting attacked the way he did.

I also become more and more reluctant with my posts, even though I would propably still consider myself "Pro-BLM". Yet I do start to doubt said viewpoint, because the witch-hunting rhetoric strikes me as the even greater evil. If the "BLM-movement" is what I am seeing in this thread, then I'd say it does more harm than good. However I still hope that it is possible to disconnect the unreflected fighting rhetoric from the objectively justified concerns. Besides I don't want to fall for people like Trump, who try to lump all BLM-protesters together.

Some of you are on the best way to get rid of opposing views. Not because they don't exist, but because they see no point in discourse with you. This is how the so-called "bubbles", that exist on both sides of the politcal spectrum, emerge.

I am surprised that you don't see the major risk of "going over the top". Your goal should be to convince the people "in the middle". The applause from like-minded people won't win you the election. For moderate dissidents the witch-hunting rhetoric can be quite deterrent though.

At least this is true, for as long as you want to work with conviction and not with intimidation. In the latter case I have to add, that the violent elimination of opinions is rather an attribute of fascist societies. Yet cancel culture is all about intimidation.

This is all fair. For sure.

As I said earlier, however, the point about this kind of culture that often goes unacknowledged - including in this thread, where I am STILL waiting to hear about how the left is more dangerous or toxic than the right, but I'm not holding my breath for that one anymore - is that this current societal atmosphere began with the far-right and the Republicans, and the post-9/11 atmosphere of hyperpatriotism in which people were castigated and ostracized over speaking out against anything having to do with the wars or the Bush administration. That's where the metamorphosis of Fox News from simple news outlet to bigoted propaganda machine started, which in my opinion was one of the most detrimental events in the history of American media. People were afraid to speak out against what they believed to be truly wrong for fear of retribution, because all we were told was how important it was to "defend freedom" and all that happy rhetorical horseshit. And that was before 2004, where the LGBTQ+ community had to watch the same administration win re-election on the back of the Defense Of Marriage Act being put on the ballot in 11 states, which created ANOTHER painful societal atmosphere of "which side are you on?" And that was before Obama being elected - right around the time Bush's old Speaker Of The House, Dennis Hastert, was sent to jail over financial crimes and child molestation - which was immediately followed by Mitch McConnell swearing to dedicate his servitude towards obstructing every effort his administration made to legislate. He is STILL standing in the other side's path while hundreds of bills gather dust on his desk and he already has a stolen Supreme Court seat under his belt in Neil Gorsuch. All the while, ANY TIME in the years since the Tea Party was voted in in 2010 - on the rhetorical back of Obama and the left not doing a good or fast enough job cleaning up Bush's Great Recession - any time that the right has to defend the heinous and reckless things that they do, they've done it by framing them as a fight with Democrats. They paint the narrative of simply wanting to do the right thing while the big bad other side stands in their way and tries to lead our country down the path to socialism or anarchy or whatever the scary word of the day is at that particular time. They redline and gerrymander voting districts nationwide and tell black people they aren't working hard enough for their right to vote; they perpetuate draconian women's rights laws to keep them under their thumb and do so using the Bible as a shield as they did with the LGBTQ+ community in the past; they condemn immigrants who come here from countries that have collapsed into chaos under the guise of making people terrified that most of those immigrants are criminals and rapists who'll come knocking down their door if they're let inside; they tell you that 99.9% of cops are great people and we would lose our country if we reformed or defunded the police, while one of the biggest reasons we can't pass relevant gun control in America is because most bills that have been written would prevent anyone with domestic abuse on their record from having a gun, and something like 40% of police have such a charge against them. And any time their morals or ethics or lack thereof are called into question, it somehow becomes the left's fault that it ever had to reach that point.
So now that the left has produced TWO movements in BLM and cancel culture that actually result in ANY kind of accountability for the kind of crooked and corrupt people who've needed dealing with for a great long while, it doesn't surprise me at all that's it's been condemned and reviled across the board. Because only here can we somehow take putting black people at the forefront of the societal narrative AND the widespread accountability of racists, bigots, rapists, child abusers, xenophobes and so on, and turn it on its head like we've seen it turned.
As I've said before, some people NEED to be intimidated, and turned away, and told in no uncertain terms that their actions, beliefs, states of mind, or penchant for causing chaos and driving dissent where it doesn't need to be, are not welcome in any capacity.
I get fucking FURIOUS about these topics and I know it, but I also implore EVERYONE to counter my points, tell me their sides, and give me the business if I'm out of line. I welcome it. I don't want anyone to ever feel like they can't call me out if they feel so compelled, because I don't get all mad as hell because I want to scare everyone away or make unnecessary bubbles; I do it because I LOVE this forum and our community to death and back, and I care not one iota about pissing off the kind of people who would sow actual dissent in our ranks or be cancelled off the face of the earth if the world knew what they were hiding. I hope they all come out of the woodwork and curse my name for wanting the FGC and the NRS bubble to be better off without them.
You yourself, Jokey, are exactly the example of a good-minded person who wants to have the debate, but doesn't want things to swing too far either way, which is the ideal kind of person to be. The fundamental problem, however, which I've brought up in the past and have yet to be set right about by anyone, is that the right swung this pendulum on its own a very long time ago, and it's only in the last 8-10 years or so that the left and the centrists who are tired of all the cheap money-grubbing rhetoric have begun to gain their footing in any useful capacity, and it took a collection of horrific circumstances and dead bodies to get there.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

At least this is true, for as long as you want to work with conviction and not with intimidation. In the latter case I have to add, that the violent elimination of opinions is rather an attribute of fascist societies. Yet cancel culture is all about intimidation.

I think the main issue that I see coming up with you, and one that is critical to discussing anything at all, is context.

Context is critical -- you can't just discuss statements, historical events, etc. by isolating them from everything that was happening around them. And that seems to be your main stumbling block.

For example, Fascism? Have you ever looked at fascist societies, and how they were cleaned up? The countries that turned it around banned all fascist symbolism, made laws against that kind of speech, and don't stand for espousing those views in public in longer.

Fascism by definition depends on ultranationalism, which is the belief that certain people belong in your nation, others do not, and that the advancement of a small group of people is worth completely tossing away the lives of others who do not look like you or have your same bloodline. It's not based on opinions, it's based on how you look, where you were born, etc.

Anyone who's actually studied the history of fascism would never compare a movement for equality, or people speaking up against sexual harassment and bullying, to an ultranationalist state. What is happening here is the exact opposite of the kind of complacency and passivity that allowed fascist regimes to come to power. Fascism was all about exclusivity -- these movements are about inclusivity and making a safer space for all. And just like the movement that banned fascism, you can't do that unless you're willing to be vocal and forceful about disempowering these kinds of bigoted and intolerant elements in your society. They thrive on complacency.

Anyway, that's one example, out of many -- but I would encourage you to not just throw these terms around and actually look at what they mean. Context is everything.