• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CNN Scoreboard: Kavanaugh Accusers 700... Biden Accuser 1

lwf said:
Agreed. If the general atmosphere of the media seems to be drifting "left" to someone, it is likely that what they are seeing is little more than social progress. Some people become stuck in their ways, so any broad social trend away from what they are used to looks like some insidious plot to destroy the America that they grew up with.
Click to expand...

I am not entirely sure I would call all of this "social progress." Not all change is progress.

In the last few years, for example, many public figures seem to have grown hostile to freedom of speech. Arguing to deplatform political rivals when those rivals neither engage, nor condone and in fact explicitly condemn violence isn't something I would consider to be social progress. For example, it's one thing to get into a discussion and argue under the rubric of individual liberty that homosexual couples should be treated as just any other couple. It's entirely another when you support people who try to drown those sorts of discussions in noise, get the events canceled, doxx the person, try to get them fired from their job or hurt the businesses they own. But I have seen much, much more despicable ideas being passed around in some news outlets. The Atlantic recently publish a piece celebrating the totalitarian government in China and arguing that as the internet matures, the government ought to step in and decide on behalf of citizens what is its proper use...

I'm very liberally minded person. I vehemently criticized religious conservatives in the past for trying to use public institutions to impose their religious preferences on the population. It used to be all the rage about a decade ago, somewhere around the time President Obama changed his mind on same-sex marriage and before the SCOTUS' decision on the matter. I told them that they should put themselves in the shoes of the people whose marriage they did not personally consider legitimate. I said that it was dangerous, that at some point and for reasons yet unforeseen the wind would turn and they'd be on the short end of the stick they were using... And what do you know? People from a fringe group within the confines of the far left bought too much into identity politics and is now openly praising Big Brother, as long as Big Brother is on their side. It's not fine when the press supports political correctness, the cancel culture that surrounds it and the dystopian authoritarian nightmare that would come to pass if those ideas were followed through by governments world wide. It's not fine when the government acts on it and it's not fine when corporations acts on it.

The reason both sides of the aisle can sometimes hurl the fictional imagery of Orwell's 1984 with apparent accuracy is that Orwell is describing the essence tyranny. The penultimate consequence of concentrating powers in a few hands is the abuse of that power and a dehumanizing treatment of everyone else... and you have editorials across the board in support of these things. When will man ever learn to live and let live?
 
TheEconomist said:
I am not entirely sure I would call all of this "social progress." Not all change is progress.

In the last few years, for example, many public figures seem to have grown hostile to freedom of speech. Arguing to deplatform political rivals when those rivals neither engage, nor condone and in fact explicitly condemn violence isn't something I would consider to be social progress. For example, it's one thing to get into a discussion and argue under the rubric of individual liberty that homosexual couples should be treated as just any other couple. It's entirely another when you support people who try to drown those sorts of discussions in noise, get the events canceled, doxx the person, try to get them fired from their job or hurt the businesses they own. But I have seen much, much more despicable ideas being passed around in some news outlets. The Atlantic recently publish a piece celebrating the totalitarian government in China and arguing that as the internet matures, the government ought to step in and decide on behalf of citizens what is its proper use...

I'm very liberally minded person. I vehemently criticized religious conservatives in the past for trying to use public institutions to impose their religious preferences on the population. It used to be all the rage about a decade ago, somewhere around the time President Obama changed his mind on same-sex marriage and before the SCOTUS' decision on the matter. I told them that they should put themselves in the shoes of the people whose marriage they did not personally consider legitimate. I said that it was dangerous, that at some point and for reasons yet unforeseen the wind would turn and they'd be on the short end of the stick they were using... And what do you know? People from a fringe group within the confines of the far left bought too much into identity politics and is now openly praising Big Brother, as long as Big Brother is on their side. It's not fine when the press supports political correctness, the cancel culture that surrounds it and the dystopian authoritarian nightmare that would come to pass if those ideas were followed through by governments world wide. It's not fine when the government acts on it and it's not fine when corporations acts on it.

The reason both sides of the aisle can sometimes hurl the fictional imagery of Orwell's 1984 with apparent accuracy is that Orwell is describing the essence tyranny. The penultimate consequence of concentrating powers in a few hands is the abuse of that power and a dehumanizing treatment of everyone else... and you have editorials across the board in support of these things. When will man ever learn to live and let live?
Click to expand...

I understand the concern, but I don't think we're even close to this yet. Political correctness comes across as more social manners enforcement through cultural change than anything else IMHO. As long as the press or any other platform is not controlled by the government, then my inclination is that they have the right to enforce good manners by cultivating a culture of inclusion if they so choose. And cultivating a culture of inclusion means not including those who want to exclude others.

Yes, there are some fanatics on the extreme left that might be open to actually legislating political correctness, but so far the 'cancel culture' seems to be relegated to just that: Culture. This is where manners should be enforced. I am 100% in favor of cultivating a culture that does not tolerate racist speech or behavior, for example. I still believe, however, that racist speech and behavior should never result in being charged with a crime solely because it is racist. Saying racist things is legal, but will and should result in your being ostracized from most cultures.

Deplatforming is an understandable concern, however unless the platform is controlled by the state, I view a platform as an expression of culture. As such, it has the right to exclude based on what the culture (or the administrator of the platform) deems appropriate. So long as no one is arrested and we don't start legislating "speechcrimes" or "thoughtcrimes," then I have no problem with it.

If a platform wants to exclude me based on my personal beliefs, so be it. They have that right. I am not entitled to a platform. I am entitled to not be imprisoned for my personal beliefs.
 
lwf said:
I understand the concern, but I don't think we're even close to this yet. Political correctness comes across as more social manners enforcement through cultural change than anything else IMHO. As long as the press or any other platform is not controlled by the government, then my inclination is that they have the right to enforce good manners by cultivating a culture of inclusion if they so choose. And cultivating a culture of inclusion means not including those who want to exclude others.
Click to expand...

I agree with your sentiment. I do not come from a place of wanting a licence to insult, or otherwise belittle people without potentially facing some consequences. I come from a place of wanting to be allowed, and to allow others to be plainly themselves. My problem is not with someone who notices something they believe is objectionable and expresses their objections or concerns. If you think that an idea or a statement expresses racist views, you should be able to say so.

My problem is more with people who would use your noble sentiment as an excuse to sience those with they disagree. I have seen a lot of people throw around words such as racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, islamophobic and even rape apologist in response to a simple disagreement on either policy, the state of research on an issue or some other aspect of a question. Usually, it is not hard for me to imagine a myriad of plausible reasons why the disagreement exists besides bigotry. As a rule of thumb, you should begin by picking the most charitable interpretation and give the other person the benefit of the doubt. Political correctness is being used as a beating stick to silence commentary some people do not like and that's not okay.

Another issue here is that I have often found that poorly phrased, clumsily presented ideas can sometimes be both shocking and somewhat true. Something might seem prejudicial to you and it might nonetheless capture something real, if only a legitimate concern paired with a bad remedy. I agree it's better if individuals decide on their own of how to treat speech. Still, I think that the entire movement is replete with a degree of arrogance that is very dangerous.

lwf said:
Yes, there are some fanatics on the extreme left that might be open to actually legislating political correctness, but so far the 'cancel culture' seems to be relegated to just that: Culture. This is where manners should be enforced. I am 100% in favor of cultivating a culture that does not tolerate racist speech or behavior, for example. I still believe, however, that racist speech and behavior should never result in being charged with a crime solely because it is racist. Saying racist things is legal, but will and should result in your being ostracized from most cultures.
Click to expand...

I understand the point, although I am not sure that the best way to control the spread of racist sentiments is to push all people who might harbor prejudices to talk only among themselves. I also have a problem with the sort of idiocy I have heard about racism during the 2010s, although to be fair it does mostly come from those fanatics. As far as I am concerned, identity politics is ripe with prejudices and it does lead some people on the far left to adopt racist attitudes.
 
TheEconomist said:
I agree with your sentiment. I do not come from a place of wanting a licence to insult, or otherwise belittle people without potentially facing some consequences. I come from a place of wanting to be allowed, and to allow others to be plainly themselves. My problem is not with someone who notices something they believe is objectionable and expresses their objections or concerns. If you think that an idea or a statement expresses racist views, you should be able to say so.

My problem is more with people who would use your noble sentiment as an excuse to sience those with they disagree. I have seen a lot of people throw around words such as racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, islamophobic and even rape apologist in response to a simple disagreement on either policy, the state of research on an issue or some other aspect of a question. Usually, it is not hard for me to imagine a myriad of plausible reasons why the disagreement exists besides bigotry. As a rule of thumb, you should begin by picking the most charitable interpretation and give the other person the benefit of the doubt. Political correctness is being used as a beating stick to silence commentary some people do not like and that's not okay.

Another issue here is that I have often found that poorly phrased, clumsily presented ideas can sometimes be both shocking and somewhat true. Something might seem prejudicial to you and it might nonetheless capture something real, if only a legitimate concern paired with a bad remedy. I agree it's better if individuals decide on their own of how to treat speech. Still, I think that the entire movement is replete with a degree of arrogance that is very dangerous.

I understand the point, although I am not sure that the best way to control the spread of racist sentiments is to push all people who might harbor prejudices to talk only among themselves. I also have a problem with the sort of idiocy I have heard about racism during the 2010s, although to be fair it does mostly come from those fanatics. As far as I am concerned, identity politics is ripe with prejudices and it does lead some people on the far left to adopt racist attitudes.
Click to expand...

There is definitely a tendency in American culture for some on the extreme left who base their identity on being culturally "woke" to adopt the very fear, ignorance, and hatred they purport to be against and simply turn it on those they fear. I agree that this is counter productive, and quite a few people who cry "cultural appropriation" are in fact guilty of the very prejudice and ignorance they think they are fighting. To see a little girl who isn't Japanese dress up like a geisha for Halloween and cry "racism" is itself an ignorant and racist attitude even if it isn't meant to be. To call a minority adopting a cultural aspect of the majority "assimilation" and vice versa "appropriation" is divisive cultural elitism, even if it isn't meant to be.
 
OK, what's going on here?

TheEconomist said:
I am not entirely sure I would call all of this "social progress." Not all change is progress.


In the last few years, for example, many public figures seem to have grown hostile to freedom of speech. Arguing to deplatform political rivals when those rivals neither engage, nor condone and in fact explicitly condemn violence isn't something I would consider to be social progress. For example, it's one thing to get into a discussion and argue under the rubric of individual liberty that homosexual couples should be treated as just any other couple. It's entirely another when you support people who try to drown those sorts of discussions in noise, get the events canceled, doxx the person, try to get them fired from their job or hurt the businesses they own. But I have seen much, much more despicable ideas being passed around in some news outlets. The Atlantic recently publish a piece celebrating the totalitarian government in China and arguing that as the internet matures, the government ought to step in and decide on behalf of citizens what is its proper use...


I'm very liberally minded person. I vehemently criticized religious conservatives in the past for trying to use public institutions to impose their religious preferences on the population. It used to be all the rage about a decade ago, somewhere around the time President Obama changed his mind on same-sex marriage and before the SCOTUS' decision on the matter. I told them that they should put themselves in the shoes of the people whose marriage they did not personally consider legitimate. I said that it was dangerous, that at some point and for reasons yet unforeseen the wind would turn and they'd be on the short end of the stick they were using... And what do you know? People from a fringe group within the confines of the far left bought too much into identity politics and is now openly praising Big Brother, as long as Big Brother is on their side. It's not fine when the press supports political correctness, the cancel culture that surrounds it and the dystopian authoritarian nightmare that would come to pass if those ideas were followed through by governments world wide. It's not fine when the government acts on it and it's not fine when corporations acts on it.


The reason both sides of the aisle can sometimes hurl the fictional imagery of Orwell's 1984 with apparent accuracy is that Orwell is describing the essence tyranny. The penultimate consequence of concentrating powers in a few hands is the abuse of that power and a dehumanizing treatment of everyone else... and you have editorials across the board in support of these things. When will man ever learn to live and let live?
Click to expand...


lwf said:
I understand the concern, but I don't think we're even close to this yet. Political correctness comes across as more social manners enforcement through cultural change than anything else IMHO. As long as the press or any other platform is not controlled by the government, then my inclination is that they have the right to enforce good manners by cultivating a culture of inclusion if they so choose. And cultivating a culture of inclusion means not including those who want to exclude others.


Yes, there are some fanatics on the extreme left that might be open to actually legislating political correctness, but so far the 'cancel culture' seems to be relegated to just that: Culture. This is where manners should be enforced. I am 100% in favor of cultivating a culture that does not tolerate racist speech or behavior, for example. I still believe, however, that racist speech and behavior should never result in being charged with a crime solely because it is racist. Saying racist things is legal, but will and should result in your being ostracized from most cultures.


Deplatforming is an understandable concern, however unless the platform is controlled by the state, I view a platform as an expression of culture. As such, it has the right to exclude based on what the culture (or the administrator of the platform) deems appropriate. So long as no one is arrested and we don't start legislating "speechcrimes" or "thoughtcrimes," then I have no problem with it.


If a platform wants to exclude me based on my personal beliefs, so be it. They have that right. I am not entitled to a platform. I am entitled to not be imprisoned for my personal beliefs.
Click to expand...

You 2 are engaged in a reasonable, honest, intellectual discussion about an issue that is real and actually worth the time to discuss...

I was under the impression that such discussions were now taboo on this forum, and civil discourse was a thing of the past...

I'll be watching you two.

:)

.
 
lwf said:
There is definitely a tendency in American culture for some on the extreme left who base their identity on being culturally "woke" to adopt the very fear, ignorance, and hatred they purport to be against and simply turn it on those they fear. I agree that this is counter productive, and quite a few people who cry "cultural appropriation" are in fact guilty of the very prejudice and ignorance they think they are fighting. To see a little girl who isn't Japanese dress up like a geisha for Halloween and cry "racism" is itself an ignorant and racist attitude even if it isn't meant to be. To call a minority adopting a cultural aspect of the majority "assimilation" and vice versa "appropriation" is divisive cultural elitism, even if it isn't meant to be.
Click to expand...

I could perhaps speak a bit about this issue from a more personal perspective.

Being a Canadian, I sometimes notice how some of my fellow citizens or myself react when we see people abroad adopting some staples of our culture. Usually, I run into someone who put their personal spin on the poutine and I just find it amusing. I cannot fathom someone being insulted or offended by anything of the sort. Imitation is the highest form of compliment. I also do not see why someone would be insulted if you only knew a little bit about their culture. I do not carry around weapons in case I run into someone who thinks Canada can be summarized by hockey, maple syrup , poutine and saying eh a little too much.
 
Last edited:
Does the incredible media bias in the US only lean left?
Click to expand...
All media leans left, even Fox is so bent on trying to sound unbiased, they run anti-Trump and anti Republican crap all day long, especially on weekends. You won't see that kind of bipartisanship anywhere else in the media, which makes Fox the only attempt at fair and balanced out there, incredible.
 
Tahuyaman said:
Generally a conservative will tell you that he or she is looking at things from a conservative viewpoint. Liberals generally deny that they view things from a liberal point of view.
Click to expand...

Debatable. Unless your definition of "liberal" is anything that doesn't exactly match conservative views. Most mainstream news is not in fact liberally biased at all, though most conservatives seem to believe that it is. CNN is admittedly an exception as is MSNBC, but these are only two of more than a dozen news sources one could consider mainstream; one of which: Fox News, is conservatively biased. So "liberal mainstream media" is a misnomer and people who watch mainstream media are not necessarily viewing things from a liberal point of view.
 
lwf said:
Debatable. Unless your definition of "liberal" is anything that doesn't exactly match conservative views. Most mainstream news is not in fact liberally biased at all, though most conservatives seem to believe that it is. CNN is admittedly an exception as is MSNBC, but these are only two of more than a dozen news sources one could consider mainstream; one of which: Fox News, is conservatively biased. So "liberal mainstream media" is a misnomer and people who watch mainstream media are not necessarily viewing things from a liberal point of view.
Click to expand...

No.....
 
Tahuyaman said:
No.....
Click to expand...

3rf2rn.jpg


The green box represents the majority of mainstream news media. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News can also be considered mainstream.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom