What's with all the moral equivalence threads lately? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-22-2004, 09:15 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kony Island Baby
Posts: 10,232
Local Time: 08:12 PM
What's with all the moral equivalence threads lately?

Are you itching to cast off those awful PC shackles and just say what you really think?

Which is what?

That we have to bomb the middle east to glass/turn it into Las Vegas/kill everyone because all of them are terrorists, or something?

What is it that you want to say? Just say it and stop wasting my time. Cause frankly, I'm awfully tired of it all.
__________________

Kieran McConville is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:19 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 05:12 AM
NO spinoffs of spinoffs allowed
__________________

U2Kitten is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:22 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kony Island Baby
Posts: 10,232
Local Time: 08:12 PM
Hi U2kitten! How the hell are you!
Kieran McConville is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:23 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 05:12 AM
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:27 PM   #5
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,226
Local Time: 04:12 AM
It's just bullshit spinning bullshit off of bullshit.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:43 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:12 AM
Spin enough bull and we can avoid the issues altogether
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:49 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 05:12 AM
Nature tries to achieve an equilibrium, but it is equally unachievable. Thus, in an attempt to reach that medium, we always swing to an extreme. In the case of political correctness, it was a result of a lack of respect for minority groups in society; so, to correct that inequality, they just swung very far left. Now that PC has gone way too far, what is the solution? To swing back to the other extreme. Let's kill them all and let God sort 'em out!

There are patterns of this all through history, but we see the most dramatic examples through the 20th century to the present, where media allows us see everything at once. Rather than ebbing and flowing through the centuries, it is now only a matter of years. Basically, the restrictive romanticist moralism of the 1950s led to the hedonistic 1960s and early 1970s, which led to the revival of Christian fundamentalism (had been dormant since the last revival in the 1920s; quelched with the Great Depression) and Christianity's tendency to be bigoted, which led to political correctness in 1994. But now we're ready to hate again, and coupled with the restrictive moralism of the Bush Administration, it can only mean one thing: a revival of the 1960s isn't too far behind. Maybe 2010, after we get tired of hating again...

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 10:25 PM   #8
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,226
Local Time: 04:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Spin enough bull and we can avoid the issues altogether
The real issue? It was introduced wrong and disscussed wrong, there's no way we will be able to discuss this issue in here when the same circular patterns keep popping up.
BVS is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 10:28 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:12 AM
Well, if we can pronounce the method of raising topics as "wrong" (especially when no personal attacks were made, and was further sanitized the second time around), we won't get anywhere as well.
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 11:14 PM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:12 PM
That second thread removed the ambiguity and made the objective of the post very clear, I think that FYM is the place where such things should be talked about and it was not a personal attack against anybody on the forum or any group in general, go back and read each post the first one was a but stronger in making the point however it was not a racist post inciting violence. I have absolutely no regrets about the thread and think it was a little presumptive to close it. Read the first post fully and you shall see what it was about, it was not a violent thread I simply wanted to get a proper discussion about how we do a diservice to Muslims around the world by allowing extremists to be labled moderates and spread hatred the world over. I am not an extremist advocating any killing when it comes to Islam and I understand that there is a large difference between the majority who stuggle to survive every day and the fundamentalist/islamists who have a genuine hatred for the west. I just want there to be a real discussion of a real issue.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 11:18 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 05:12 AM
You probably shouldn't have colored your text in the first thread to be the same color as the background. I doubt most people tried to highlight what they didn't see, although I'll concede it was "clever." What they did see was you referring to Muslims in a manner that I'd expect white supremacist sites to do. That's probably why it was closed.

But something tells me this one might end up closed for referring to closed threads. It happens.

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 11:25 PM   #12
The Fly
 
GARY#2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 256
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Nature tries to achieve an equilibrium, but it is equally unachievable.
Natural tendencies are more compensatory; not to ultimately reach balance, merely to accomodate disparity. But, Le Chatelier doesn't belong in a political thread does he? Probably not productive to quibble connotations in a thread that is clearly a semantics issue...



The common dissection of political issues into a polarized spectrum of have and have not is too simplistic. Generalizations trickle down from there, and eventually scientific terms are imposed in the wrong context. Through this you get Political Correctness, or rather... objective morality. Melon described the problem with this method, and its many extreme adjustments.

What's with the current trend of relative-morality threads? I don't think it's a symptom with negative consequence. It's comforting to see that PC is being scrutinized on a broader scale. The principles of respect and cultural sensitivity are worthy pursuits, but not at the abandonment of personal bias. Instead, "moral-objectivity" should be replaced with self-consciousness. If one can identify their own moral centrism, then most likely a more meaningful discussion of perspectives can be achieved with others. Of course, this might be at the untimely expense of pretention and self-rationalization...

I guess compensation is a necessity.

Damn you nature.
GARY#2 is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 11:27 PM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:12 PM
If I was a mod I probably wouldn't let me open my mouth. Just getting the facts straight there and on the record even though there is a clear clarifier in a particular post that occured before this one.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:17 AM   #14
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
That second thread removed the ambiguity and made the objective of the post very clear, I think that FYM is the place where such things should be talked about and it was not a personal attack against anybody on the forum or any group in general, go back and read each post the first one was a but stronger in making the point however it was not a racist post inciting violence. I have absolutely no regrets about the thread and think it was a little presumptive to close it. Read the first post fully and you shall see what it was about, it was not a violent thread I simply wanted to get a proper discussion about how we do a diservice to Muslims around the world by allowing extremists to be labled moderates and spread hatred the world over. I am not an extremist advocating any killing when it comes to Islam and I understand that there is a large difference between the majority who stuggle to survive every day and the fundamentalist/islamists who have a genuine hatred for the west. I just want there to be a real discussion of a real issue.
The thing is, A_Wanderer, you come off as extremely ignorant and ethnocentric in your writing. But I see enough of this garbage in this forum that I hardly give a shit any more.
pub crawler is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:25 AM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:12 PM
I do try to avoid being ignorant and ethnocentric, may you please give me incidences so that I can improve any flaws, is it wrong to want a just peace?

****EDIT*****
Go here to see why I can sometimes loose sight of the better things in the world.
http://forums.gawaher.com/index.php?...pic=14689&st=0
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 01:30 AM   #16
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I do try to avoid being ignorant and ethnocentric, may you please give me incidences so that I can improve any flaws, is it wrong to want a just peace?
For starters, you wrote "Millions of Muslims find such speech unfair and wrong but Millions more view such rhetoric as truth."

How do you intend to prove that statement factual?
pub crawler is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 01:31 AM   #17
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 03:12 AM
double post.
pub crawler is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 01:39 AM   #18
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Written by A_Wanderer:

"This quote should show to a degree that most of us would criticise anybody who said that about Muslims (and rightly so) but care not a jot about Muslim Holy Men inciting violence against the rest of the world and getting labled moderates and gaining legitmacy and leads me to say why we are putting up with it when so many lives are at stake, can't non-muslims call it what it really is - blatant racism - without having the label turned against them."

I'm curious, A_Wanderer, as to why you are so careful to distinguish between "non-muslims" and you? Your argument is centered around an "us against them" mentality. My question to you is: why?
pub crawler is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 02:23 AM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:12 PM
**Double Post** read below.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 02:24 AM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:12 PM
I am an atheist, I say us collectively because I am speaking from the perspective of a westerner and I am assuming that most on this board also come from a simmilar background. I have no problem with people wanting to worship the way they want but I have a problem with those who commit violence in the name of religion, assuming that nobody on this forum advocates violence in the name of religion then its safe to say that we are collectively an "us" who condemn those who commit evil deeds and use religion as an excuse.

I have a very serious problem with the world in its current state because there is a definite threat from islamists who desire to see a renewed caliphate on a global scale, this is an extreme view and it shouldn't even be heard in the world but it is. The reason that these men are able to preach this and gain influence all over the world is because they are having their agenda facilitated by the west. Every time that we allow an extremist preacher to come to the west and give an obligitary message of peace and be percieved as a moderate we are giving him legitimacy and stifling real voices of peace and understanding. I am not Islamaphobic, I am stating it quite clearly just to defend myself here, I have no problem if people want to live their lives anyway they want with one key exception. The exception is when their way of life will kill or injur others, that cannot be allowed to occur and we cannot allow such a violent school of thought gain influence in the world, I will proudly fight against violence and ignorance in the world because I believe people have indivisible rights the world over and these men, those clerics that wan't to see the Jews exterminated and other Infidels made into Dhimmies in a global Islamic Autocracy are a direct threat to these individual rights that have proved so sucessfull for western civilization, Ideal and Values that have been fought for by our forfathers against Tyranny, Fascism and Communism, Islamism is another crisis to liberty however it also provides an oppertunity for the western world to spread the concept of liberal democracy around the world and bring about a revolution in thought in the Islamic world, if this happens there will be no more war on terror or pointless proxy wars - there will be peace.

I do have an us and them mentality that is true, I have a problem with Islamism, I have definied it before but I shall again, Islamism is a political ideology that entails having the political, economic and social imperitives of the state become Islamic in the strictest sense, literal interperatations which would threaten individual liberty all over the world in the same manner the Taliban did in Afghanistan. It is a hateful, repressive and violent ideology which we are most certainly engaged in a war with. I cannot say the world is against such men because the world obviously is not, many people are under the misguided assumption that their cause is righteous and they either support the Islamists directly or sit back and do not criticise. There is most certainly us and them, there are those that would have the world live in darkness and destruction or those that would see a free and open world where people have the right to live the way that they want without fear of violence or percecution.

I advocate freedom from religious percecution, the right for people to live in peace in free and open societies and I am being labled ignorant and ethnocentric? Is it because I am saying that there is a problem within Islamic society that needs to be removed. I will not say that this justifies my argument that criticism of Islam risks being labled a racist however it certainly makes one think.

In regards to particular criticism I shall defend my position as I am fully entitled too.

Quote:
For starters, you wrote "Millions of Muslims find such speech unfair and wrong but Millions more view such rhetoric as truth."

How do you intend to prove that statement factual?
I think that it is fair to say that the majority of Muslims in the world are peaceful people who have little interest in the politics of the world, they follow religious teachings loosely and lead normal lives. I also think that of the 1.1 billion Muslims in the world there is definitely a section that follows a selectively violent version of their religion and who honestly believe that "the Jews are the decendents of those who were turned into Pigs and Mokeys by allah". These people are the ones that are able to walk into nightclubs and blow themselves up, murder children at point blank range and commit mass murder on September 11. There is definitely millions of people who cheered for September 11 and support the destruction of the Israeli nation and we see this in the views presented in the Arab Media and the body bags created by terrorism. That statement is a legitimate point that there are violent people out there who do follow their relgion in a violent fashion and that we must never overlook this in the name of political correctness. This section of violent Muslims who either take up arms directly of support violence has been shown in polls and through mainstream Arab culture to number in the millions hence we all have a problem on our hands that must be dealt with.

Quote:
can't non-muslims call it what it really is - blatant racism - without having the label turned against them."

I'm curious, A_Wanderer, as to why you are so careful to distinguish between "non-muslims" and you? Your argument is centered around an "us against them" mentality. My question to you is: why?
Quite simply if a Muslim stands up and criticises "holy-men" who will justify violence with selective religious teachings then he will be listened to even if he calls them "evil". If a westerner or other non-Muslim were to make the same allegations against such "holy-men" and used the world evil then they would be labled a racist and would be shouted down even if their arguments were the same. It is a double standard which is applied for no other reason than political correctness rather than genuine concern for religious freedoms.

There is a serious problem in the world and it isn't in the White House, it is in every religious school where children are told that it is righteous to murder nonbelievers, it is whenever the media will call evil men millitants thus reducing the publics perception of the evil message they are spreading throughout the world, it is whenever we don't condem Islamic imperialism and crimes because we feel that it is nessicary to hold them to different standards in the name of political correctness. If we expect to survive the 21st century we must bring Islam out of the dark ages, we must not allow Islamists to hijack an entire religion and we must support real moderates and progressives rather than Janus headed extremists. That is what I believe and that is why I will point out injustice when I see it.
__________________

A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×