Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Extremist rhetoric on Trump threads

Options
12467…10

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Flint Fredstone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,519 ✭✭✭Flint Fredstone


    Can we just get clarification on this? Do the higher ups at boards accept that Donald Trump hates a particular race of people and therefore he is definitely a racist and that's fact not opinion?


  • Options
    #93
    Havockk
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭Havockk


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    So, all who oppose Trump are extremists now?

    May I remind you, you started this thread, and I could not be more gratified, after this statement especially, about my participation in it.


  • Options
    #94
    26000 Elephants
    Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    Yeah, we are here to discuss the extreme rhetoric not Trump. There's been a mod note to say just that, you might want to read back.

    No, somebody said being racist was subjective. I gave an example of why its not. Its entirely objective when it contravenes the laws against it.

    The fact that Trump is an example of this is merely convenient.


  • Options
    #95
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,928 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    In terms of rhetoric there is a difference between someone being labelled a racist, or a misogynist unconditionally and someone being accused of implementing racist policies or committing acts of sexual abuse.


  • Options
    #96
    Flint Fredstone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,519 ✭✭✭Flint Fredstone


    26000 Elephants wrote: »
    No, somebody said being racist was subjective. I gave an example of why its not. Its entirely objective when it contravenes the laws against it.

    The fact that Trump is an example of this is merely convenient.

    We were specifically told not to discuss Trump himself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    26000 Elephants
    Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    We were specifically told not to discuss Trump himself.

    Then why dont you stop discussing him? This from bout 3 posts back:
    Can we just get clarification on this? Do the higher ups at boards accept that Donald Trump hates a particular race of people and therefore he is definitely a racist and that's fact not opinion?


  • Options
    #98
    Flint Fredstone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,519 ✭✭✭Flint Fredstone


    26000 Elephants wrote: »
    Then why dont you stop discussing him? This from bout 3 posts back:

    Jesus Christ...


  • Options
    #99
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    Who here on boards gets to decide if a person can be called a vile racist?

    Who here gets to decide what is extremist rhetoric? See the problem with the fallacy you are putting forward? It calls into the question the very point of this thread.


  • Options
    #100
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    Are you telling me that in this world today that people are only called racist if they hate another person who's skin happens to be a different colour?
    C'mon, seriously...

    If they hate another person because of their colour, then they are racist.


  • Options
    #101
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    What should be considered racism?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
    Therefore racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial. According to a United Nations convention on racial discrimination, there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination...

    ...Though many countries around the globe have passed laws related to race and discrimination, the first significant international human rights instrument developed by the United Nations (UN) was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).[19] The UDHR was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The UDHR recognizes that if people are to be treated with dignity, they require economic rights, social rights including education, and the rights to cultural and political participation and civil liberty. It further states that everyone is entitled to these rights "without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."

    I think the Universal declaration of Human rights is a pretty good litmus test, inconvenient though it may be for those who wish to be able to enact prejudice and discrimination on the basis ethnicity or religion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Do you have any evidence that the rhetoric isn't also factual? Many of things that people say about true are not nice things to hear about. But many are true. Maybe instead of being angry at people reporting the not nice things Trump does, you should be angry at Trump for doing not nice things?


  • Options
    #103
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Permabear, can you give a strong example of the issue you presented in your OP? Some piece of non-factual extreme anti-Trump rhetoric that wasn't responded to by a mod for it's extremism but should have been?


  • Options
    #104
    Flint Fredstone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,519 ✭✭✭Flint Fredstone


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Who here gets to decide what is extremist rhetoric? See the problem with the fallacy you are putting forward? It calls into the question the very point of this thread.

    That's a fair point and I suppose that's up for discussion too.

    I haven't argued against the extremist rhetoric myself, just commented on my experiences reading threads. I'm not trying to shout anybody down, simply making the point that perceived racism and racism can be two different things.


  • Options
    #105
    Robineen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 300 ✭✭Robineen


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    It's more prevalent because boards membership appears to be slanted to the left so there is likely more extreme left-wingers on the site than extreme right-wingers.

    I think it would be folly to think that everyone reacting strongly towards Trump is an extremist. Memoch summed it up well up-thread.

    I don't really believe you would be as sensitive to right wing extremism. As I said earlier, you claimed to be equidistant from Trump and Clinton in your view of them in another thread here not so long ago. But it's clear to see you were far more down on Clinton than Trump in the lead up to the election. It's hard to be believe you are not biased to the right on this issue and any disclaimer you slot in about feeling the same way about right wing extremism come across mealy-mouthed.


  • Options
    #106
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Memnoch wrote: »
    What should be considered racism?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism



    I think the Universal declaration of Human rights is a pretty good litmus test, inconvenient though it may be for those who wish to be able to enact prejudice and discrimination on the basis ethnicity or religion.
    Discrimination based on race.
    I put "racism definition" into google and here's the results that come up on the first page from dictionary sites.
    Oxford Dictionaries wrote:
    Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior:
    Merriam-Webster wrote:
    a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
    Dictionary.com wrote:
    a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
    Cambridge Dictionary wrote:
    the belief that people's qualities are influenced by their race and that the members of other races are not as good as the members of your own, or the resulting unfair treatment of members of other races:
    TheFreeDictionary wrote:
    1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
    2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.


  • Options
    #107
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    Can we just get clarification on this? Do the higher ups at boards accept that Donald Trump hates a particular race of people and therefore he is definitely a racist and that's fact not opinion?
    If this is concerning religion, then no. I don't know how often this needs to be said, or people stop conflating the two, but religion =/= "race". Christianity is not a "race" and neither is Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism etc. The only religion that I can think of where it could be in play is Judaism.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #108
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,433 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Wibbs wrote: »
    If this is concerning religion, then no. I don't know how often this needs to be said, or people stop conflating the two, but religion =/= "race". Christianity is not a "race" and neither is Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism etc. The only religion that I can think of where it could be in play is Judaism.

    Nobody mentioned religion.


  • Options
    #109
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,311 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    Wibbs wrote: »
    If this is concerning religion, then no. I don't know how often this needs to be said, or people stop conflating the two, but religion =/= "race". Christianity is not a "race" and neither is Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism etc. The only religion that I can think of where it could be in play is Judaism.
    But by the same point there is only one race; skin colour does not different race make.


  • Options
    #110
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    kneemos wrote: »
    Nobody mentioned religion.
    My mistake, I wrongfully assumed it was in reference to the recent travel bans.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #111
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    Wibbs wrote: »
    If this is concerning religion, then no. I don't know how often this needs to be said, or people stop conflating the two, but religion =/= "race". Christianity is not a "race" and neither is Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism etc. The only religion that I can think of where it could be in play is Judaism.

    Honestly that's one of the things that irks me the most. Screaming "Islam isn't a race" doesn't change a thing for me. Saying "kill all Muslims" is going to get the same response in AH from me as saying "kill all blacks".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    I'm not trying to shout anybody down, simply making the point that perceived racism and racism can be two different things.

    ...and then what? Yes, perceived racism and actual racism are two different things, anyone can play the victim card no matter how warranted that play may be, but unless you are explaining which one side actually is actually racist or not then you haven't added anything to the discussion.
    We have definitions, legal definitions, of racism (and sexism and other forms of discrimination and harassment), just point to the definitions to move the discussion along.


  • Options
    #113
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Are comments where posters hope that Donal Trump is killed/dies soon really acceptable?
    Hopefully we'll soon be calling him "The late Donald Trump".


  • Options
    #114
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Skylinehead wrote: »
    Honestly that's one of the things that irks me the most. Screaming "Islam isn't a race" doesn't change a thing for me. Saying "kill all Muslims" is going to get the same response in AH from me as saying "kill all blacks".
    Oh I agree, but it isn't racism.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #115
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Oh I agree, but it isn't racism.

    I am curious. Why and in what instance do you make an exception for Judaism?


  • Options
    #116
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    jackofalltrades wrote: »
    Are comments where posters hope that Donal Trump is killed/dies soon really acceptable?

    Nope. I would agree that this should be classified as unacceptable and extremist rhetoric. And the poster should be sanctioned accordingly.


  • Options
    #117
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Memnoch wrote: »
    I am curious. Why and in what instance do you make an exception for Judaism?
    Because while say Christianity or Islam draw the faithful from a very varied set of backgrounds ethnically and "racially", Judaism is most associated with a much narrower set of ethnicities, who also identify as a particular ethnicity. Yes there are for example Ethiopian practicing Jews, even they show can traces of DNA from the founders of that group.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #118
    Robineen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 300 ✭✭Robineen


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I would say that is exactly what that says. This is just proving the point made about Trump being sued in the 70s, not disproving it. :D


  • Options
    #119
    Robineen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 300 ✭✭Robineen


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Permabear, can you give a strong example of the issue you presented in your OP? Some piece of non-factual extreme anti-Trump rhetoric that wasn't responded to by a mod for it's extremism but should have been?

    I'd like some examples too.


  • Options
    #120
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,433 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Robineen wrote: »
    I'd like some examples too.


    You don't need examples,he explained in detail what he thought the problem was.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    26000 Elephants
    Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Flint Fredstone wrote: »
    I'm not trying to shout anybody down, simply making the point that perceived racism and racism can be two different things.

    Could it not also be argued that "perceived racism" (your words) is simply racism that you dont have a problem with? So in fact its the same thing really.

    In the example I gave above (I promise not to mention names) you see the defendants actions as mere "perceived racism" but the courts thought otherwise. They are not 2 different things.

    Just because your value system allows you to see something wrong as being acceptable does not make it OK.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement