|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 15:17:31 GMT
The Nazis were guilty of crimes against humanity so no, I don't think it was wrong. I haven't thought about it much. Purging officials involved in the Nazi party is one thing, but banning Mein Kampf etc. were in my view, stupid. How so? If you want to wipe Nazism from the face of the earth, better to try to destroy it within moral constraints rather than risk it happening all over again because of some misguided libertarian belief that no idea should be beyond the pale. You can't control what people think and say, Young Ireland. It would be a scary situation if we could. Removing people from high office is one thing. Trying to "wipe out" a particular view of the world is quite another thing.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 15:20:59 GMT
It's impossible to discuss such matters with you, Young Ireland. You have a hysterical reaction to anything you consider racism, xenophobia, nationalism etc. God knows where it comes from. This is the man who thinks Patrick Pearse is comparable to Timothy McVeigh. Asking what proof I have of private conversations is a bit silly, isn't it? Don't you think your own reaction to political correctness could be seen as hysterical? And yes, I stand by that comparison 100%. Feel free to mock all you like, it's all water off a duck's back to me. Also, I was not asking for evidence of private conversations, but rather your assertion that the majority of people agree with you, which I find to be rather dubious. No, I don't, because mine is based on fact and current occurrences. You are fretting about neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klan members who barely exist outside the fevered imagination of Guardian readers, while evidence of PC's stranglehold on free speech and freedom of association is abundant. We are living in a world where serious journalists argue that a man should be allowed to declare himself a woman, where freedom in general and the religious freedom in particular is under constant attack. Do I really have to elaborate? My reaction to PC is proportionate; your reaction to racism etc. (which I think barely exists in developed countries) is wildly disproportionate.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 8, 2018 15:24:31 GMT
Don't you think your own reaction to political correctness could be seen as hysterical? And yes, I stand by that comparison 100%. Feel free to mock all you like, it's all water off a duck's back to me. Also, I was not asking for evidence of private conversations, but rather your assertion that the majority of people agree with you, which I find to be rather dubious. No, I don't, because mine is based on fact and current occurrences. You are fretting about neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klan members who barely exist outside the fevered imagination of Guardian readers, while evidence of PC's stranglehold on free speech and freedom of association is abundant. We are living in a world where serious journalists argue that a man should be allowed to declare himself a woman, where freedom in general and the religious freedom in particular is under constant attack. Do I really have to elaborate? My reaction to PC is proportionate; your reaction to racism etc. (which I think barely exists in developed countries) is wildly disproportionate. I'm not fretting about neo-Nazis and KKK members (in fact I didn't mention the latter in this conversation anywwhere): I'm fretting about people who give them a respectability they do not deserve simply because they agree with them on a few isolated points.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 8, 2018 15:27:22 GMT
How so? If you want to wipe Nazism from the face of the earth, better to try to destroy it within moral constraints rather than risk it happening all over again because of some misguided libertarian belief that no idea should be beyond the pale. You can't control what people think and say, Young Ireland. It would be a scary situation if we could. Removing people from high office is one thing. Trying to "wipe out" a particular view of the world is quite another thing. But you can discourage it. The fact that Our Blessed Lord exhorts us to guard our thoughts suggests that some thoughts are wrong (something I have been very much guilty of myself, I admit) and it is perfectly legitimate to say so and try to stamp them out.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 15:56:28 GMT
I'm not against taboos in general. Taboos regarding blasphemy, sex and the eliminative functions make perfect sense to me. I know there have been different periods in social history where manners have relaxed and tightened, but in general, I think those taboos would make sense to the vast majority of people who have lived.
I think the test is history. The current hyper-sensitivity about race, ethnicity, and gender is historically unique, as far as I can tell. And I don't think it can last.
I also think there is an inevitable reaction, anyway. You can't shame a whole people forever. We are seeing the reaction in Japan today.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 8, 2018 16:26:01 GMT
I'm not against taboos in general. Taboos regarding blasphemy, sex and the eliminative functions make perfect sense to me. I know there have been different periods in social history where manners have relaxed and tightened, but in general, I think those taboos would make sense to the vast majority of people who have lived. I think the test is history. The current hyper-sensitivity about race, ethnicity, and gender is historically unique, as far as I can tell. And I don't think it can last. I also think there is an inevitable reaction, anyway. You can't shame a whole people forever. We are seeing the reaction in Japan today. But if it is acceptable to place taboos on blasphemy and sexual issues but not on race, is that not special pleading? Also, what's going on in Japan?
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 16:31:42 GMT
Yes, it is special pleading. I think some taboos reflect permanent human nature and some reflect transient preoccupations.
I was referring to the rise of nationalism and open veneration of war heroes in Japan
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 16:33:00 GMT
"Transient preoccupations" is putting it politely. Ideological agendas is a better way to put it.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 8, 2018 16:36:26 GMT
Yes, it is special pleading. I think some taboos reflect permanent human nature and some reflect transient preoccupations. I was referring to the rise of nationalism and open veneration if the wae dead in Japan The problem with Japan is that it was not properly deradicalised after WWII. Hirohito got off effectively scot-free, (with Tojo being used as a scapegoat), simply having to renounce his "divinity" and Gen. McArthur was more content to have a compliant Cold War ally than he was in doing what was done in Germany. If anything, Japan represents the dangers of NOT deradicalising a populace after a war.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 8, 2018 16:51:22 GMT
I'm talking about holding people accountable for the deeds of their ancestors, shaming them generations later, and stigmatising the natural expression of a nation's sense of identity. It can only lead to a reaction.
I'll let you have the last word if you wish. By the way, I was not mocking you.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 9, 2018 15:43:24 GMT
To be perfectly honest, I don't really take all the virtue-signalling about anti-racism seriously. I don't think it's motivated by a concern for black people, any more than I think virtue signalling about Islamophobia is motivated by concern for Muslims, or feminism is motivated by concern for women. It's purely destructive; the destruction of traditions, social bonds, local attachments, the whole intricate web of privileges, humour, understandings, tact, delicacy, toleration, etc. etc. which a society builds up over many, many generations. I think such destructiveness is motivated by a red-eyed, resentful lust for Year Zero, the tabula rasa, the erasure of all specialness and distinctiveness. I believe this is the motivating factor of those who want to tear down statues, eliminate borders, smash traditions, forbid words and phrases, etc. etc. These people seem to crave a universal sameness over all the globe. Roger put it well in his video: "Thou shalt be abstract, thou shalt be abstract, thou shalt be abstract." I call them secularist-liberal-globalists.
It is similar to the attitude of Irish liberals regarding our Good Friday licensing laws. It didn't matter that it was just one day in the year. The tradition didn't matter (tradition is to be despised, not protected). It didn't matter that anyone could stock up on dribk the day before, if they really felt the need to drink that day. It was a deviation from sameness, and sameness must be absolute. All difference must be abolished, except differences at the level of the individual and personal choice.
I do not believe anyone is harmed when an atheist's child is asked to either sit through religion class or sit outside. I do not believe anyone is harmed by a statue to a Confederate general. I do not believe anyone is harmed by a Christmas crib in a hospital. I do not believe anyone is harmed when they are expected to use the bathroom of their biological gender. I do not think anyone is harmed when a black child appears in an ad wearing a t-shirt saying "coolest monkey in the jungle". I do not think anyone is harmed by compulsory Irish in school. I do not think anyone is harmed if an air steward is called an air hostess.
If the Alt Right are allies against all THAT-- well, I can agree with them thus far, while disagreeing with their racialism and anti-semitism. I don't see very many others stepping into the breach against the globalist juggernaut.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 19, 2018 20:10:51 GMT
Just in case anyone is convinced by Maolsheachlann or Roger that the alt-right are pontential allies, they might want to think again after reading this: thebridgehead.ca/2018/08/13/why-conservatives-cannot-support-faith-goldy/I might add BTW that Maolsheachlann's logic, if I am understanding it correctly, implies that political correctness is actually worse than Nazism (of which there are many adherents in the alt-right), therefore we ought to ally with Nazis to defeat the liberals. I accept that he doesn't actually think this, since his animated opposition to political correctness has clouded his judgement IMHO, but experience shows that that tactic leads to disaster. Horthy tried it, Petain tried it, the alt-light are trying it, and in all cases, it backfires. For your own sake Maolsheachlann, you need to take a step back and think your attitudes through before you end up damaging yourself and possibly everyone around you.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 19, 2018 20:53:11 GMT
Just in case anyone is convinced by Maolsheachlann or Roger that the alt-right are pontential allies, they might want to think again after reading this: thebridgehead.ca/2018/08/13/why-conservatives-cannot-support-faith-goldy/I might add BTW that Maolsheachlann's logic, if I am understanding it correctly, implies that political correctness is actually worse than Nazism (of which there are many adherents in the alt-right), therefore we ought to ally with Nazis to defeat the liberals. I accept that he doesn't actually think this, since his animated opposition to political correctness has clouded his judgement IMHO, but experience shows that that tactic leads to disaster. Horthy tried it, Petain tried it, the alt-light are trying it, and in all cases, it backfires. For your own sake Maolsheachlann, you need to take a step back and think your attitudes through before you end up damaging yourself and possibly everyone around you. I can't really see anything in that article except: "If you take the Alt Right seriously you will be ostracized." That's not argument, it's just a cautionary tale, intimidation, and cowardice. Political correctness is far, far, far worse than Nazis. Because there ARE NO Nazis. The Nazis came to an end in 1945. They are not coming back. The idea that we should suppress free speech, freedom of association and abolish the nation state out of some dread that the Nazis will be revived...is just crazy to me. It's as hysterical as the reactions of free market radicals who think any kind of redistribution is Stalinism. The positive programme of the Alt Right is never going to be implemented. There will be no ethno-state (in the sense they mean it), there will be no mass deportations. That's all pure la-la land. But the negative element of their programme-- pushing back against PC-- can achieve a great deal. I see them as shock troops in the cause of free speech.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 19, 2018 20:59:30 GMT
Young Ireland, the funny thing is, I also get flak from people on the Catholic right for not being uncompromising enough in that direction. At least, I've got a lot of it on social media. I don't really believe in stigmatizing ideas or movements. I think you have to take all ideas on their merits, and try to see the good and bad in them. One of the results of just dismissing points of view is that you have no arguments against them because you don't take them seriously. I mean, look at this discussion between Richard Spencer and this Guardian reporter. I don't like Richard Spencer, but he trounces the journalist here-- because the journalist just doesn't have any responses, because he can't believe anyone is making these arguments. Just look at the comments-- on a Guardian video!
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 19, 2018 21:10:55 GMT
Just in case anyone is convinced by Maolsheachlann or Roger that the alt-right are pontential allies, they might want to think again after reading this: thebridgehead.ca/2018/08/13/why-conservatives-cannot-support-faith-goldy/I might add BTW that Maolsheachlann's logic, if I am understanding it correctly, implies that political correctness is actually worse than Nazism (of which there are many adherents in the alt-right), therefore we ought to ally with Nazis to defeat the liberals. I accept that he doesn't actually think this, since his animated opposition to political correctness has clouded his judgement IMHO, but experience shows that that tactic leads to disaster. Horthy tried it, Petain tried it, the alt-light are trying it, and in all cases, it backfires. For your own sake Maolsheachlann, you need to take a step back and think your attitudes through before you end up damaging yourself and possibly everyone around you. I can't really see anything in that article except: "If you take the Alt Right seriously you will be ostracized." That's not argument, it's just a cautionary tale, intimidation, and cowardice. Political correctness is far, far, far worse than Nazis. Because there ARE NO Nazis. The Nazis came to an end in 1945. They are not coming back. The idea that we should suppress free speech, freedom of association and abolish the nation state out of some dread that the Nazis will be revived...is just crazy to me. It's as hysterical as the reactions of free market radicals who think any kind of redistribution is Stalinism. The positive programme of the Alt Right is never going to be implemented. There will be no ethno-state (in the sense they mean it), there will be no mass deportations. That's all pure la-la land. But the negative element of their programme-- pushing back against PC-- can achieve a great deal. I see them as shock troops in the cause of free speech. Jonathon van Maren of all people cannot be dismissed as a coward, given that he has taken very unpopular stances regarding life and family (in Canada, lest we forget). Don't forget that foolhardiness is as much of a sin as cowardice is. Also, if you think there are no Nazis, then you are sorely mistaken. OK, if you want to be pedantic, yes there are no Nazis, but there are many neo-Nazis in the alt-right, indeed that man who coined the term and is the person most associated with the alt-right, Richard Spencer is one. If you think the idea that in power that the alt-right will not seek to implement their plans is hysterical, I will remind you in 1932, many Germans thought that Hitler would moderate his views on coming to power. Also, the problem with using mercenaries to fight your battles is that they have no loyalty to you and will abandon you as soon as something better comes along.
|
|