|
Post by robeiae on Jun 26, 2018 11:50:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 26, 2018 12:22:36 GMT -5
Doxxing is always wrong.
Unless it's Hitler.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Jun 27, 2018 15:29:04 GMT -5
I'm a big fan of the right of privacy, and given the current heated political climate, I see potential for this to go horribly wrong. I'm also a big fan of free speech and shunning, so in a more adult political climate I could see this as a practical counter-measure to government overreach.
OTOH, the on;y thing new about this is the direction of flow. governments have been compiling databases of activists and using them for harassment purposes for decades. It's kinda interesting to see the reaction when the shoe's on the other foot.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jun 27, 2018 16:27:54 GMT -5
An interesting observation: think back to (or Google) all the incidents of college/university profs and instructors saying or doing horrible, hateful things motivated by their political ideology that have made headlines over the past 2 or 3 years.
Now count how many of them were conservative and how many of them were liberal (if you're able to find more than one conservative, I'll be really surprised).
This type of garbage behavior seems to be mostly on one side of the aisle for these types of incidents in the current climate.
You can draw your own conclusions. I just think that's interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 28, 2018 9:38:57 GMT -5
OTOH, the on;y thing new about this is the direction of flow. governments have been compiling databases of activists and using them for harassment purposes for decades. It's kinda interesting to see the reaction when the shoe's on the other foot. When it was done in the past, it was illegal, if it is done now, it's very illegal (and causes a major scandal when it's discovered), and the vast majority of government employees are against any such abuses. (I am speaking primarily about the US government here, of course.) I think people who think this tactic is a good idea are also not considering the end-game: you harass everyone who is vulnerable to community opinion and actually cares about civility and the rule of law out of the government, and the only people left will be, basically, the ones who don't give a shit.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 28, 2018 15:04:40 GMT -5
I was under the impression that most college/university profs and instructors are liberal. Assuming this is true, and having observed garbage behavior on both "sides," I conclude that the relative proportions of assholes in each ideological group are likely similar.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 28, 2018 15:37:07 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't think you can make a generalization based on the behavior of college professors except that college professors (especially in fields that encourage social activism) overwhelmingly lean liberal, which is not exactly a revelation.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Jun 28, 2018 15:58:37 GMT -5
Doxxing in general is a bad thing. (Unless Hitler, as Christine posted above.) In this case, regardless that I believe strongly in our country's sovereignty and the right to defend its borders, there are other things ICE agents do that are very important and probably what these left wingers who are talking about abolishing ICE would like to continue -- investigation of child trafficking, investigation of gangs like MS-13 that cross nations, arms trafficking, etc.. And when you dox an entire list of government agents like this, and have no idea of each one's individual ethics, priorities, values, behaviors, you're trying to sink an entire ship when perhaps a tiny percentage of folks are doing what you disagree with, and even in that percentage, a great many might be doing the best they can to fulfill their roles with compassion and ethically. It's also encouraging violence against those folks, at a time when tempers and emotions are flaring. There have been stories in the news recently about ICE agents getting death threats.
This is just another example of the way things are heading in terms of civil discourse. And given my thread about the tone here on TCG, I'm sure you all know where I land on the map of the importance of civility.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jun 28, 2018 17:02:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't think you can make a generalization based on the behavior of college professors except that college professors (especially in fields that encourage social activism) overwhelmingly lean liberal, which is not exactly a revelation. It was more of a comment on the current extreme histrionics of several on the far left, many of whom work happen to work in academia. The ones who have watched The Last Jedi too many times and now feel that they, too, are part of some sort of "Resistance," and apparently that means that some of them feel they have to lash out like overly emotional toddlers having meltdowns and throwing tantrums. And, that's another difference I see between the far right and far left. Ultra-conservatives turn their anger into mobilization and they get shit done (often very horrible shit). Ultra-lefties wail, caterwaul, and have conniption fits instead. Ultimately, they achieve nothing for their cause and in some cases actually damage the brand. But, they publicly pat themselves on the back and exchange social media high-fives while totally oblivious to the fact that they accomplished nothing but reputational damage. #Resistance Academics/scholars are often viewed as reasonable intellectuals (ha, if people only knew the truth), so when some of them do ridiculous shit like this, I feel it gives the rest of us a bad name. It's a lot like having a family member who is a constant fuck up. You want them to do well, but they keep finding ways to let you down and embarrass the whole family. I'm sure anyone would feel similarly if a small segment of political radicals in their profession did this kind of stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 28, 2018 18:20:40 GMT -5
This is just another example of the way things are heading in terms of civil discourse. And given my thread about the tone here on TCG, I'm sure you all know where I land on the map of the importance of civility. Doxxing is wrong. The alternative to doxxing is NOT doxxing. Suggesting civil discourse as a fix will likely fall on deaf ears. That said, I have noticed a strong increase in appeals for civility from conservatives in response to Sanders being asked to leave a restaurant and Nielsen getting heckled. I find this very hypocritical, since most of those conservatives have decidedly not, for the last almost two years, been appealing to their own president to engage civilly. In most cases, they make excuses for Trump's incivility. "He's a fighter" and "If you hit him he's gonna hit back" and "He's just telling it like it is" and other similar bravado-worshiping nonsense rhetoric. Trump's incivility is transparently about his own ego, but his supporters defend it. And yet, when people get angry and protest about children at the border being taken from their parents, put in cages, treated inhumanely, it's OH NO WAIT, LET'S BE CIVIL ABOUT THIS. The truth is, Trump revels in uncivil discourse. He participates in it, encourages it, loves it. And instead of recognizing this incivility as harmful, his base cheers it, and people like you--who do have a sense of its harmfulness and are, yourselves, civil--excuse it, rationalize it, or minimize it. Right up until the Dems are behaving badly, and then they get inordinately concerned with civility.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 28, 2018 20:13:01 GMT -5
A small segment of people I've encountered in my profession as a CPA (other CPAs, attorneys, investment brokers, bankers, entrepreneurs, investors) are demonstrably incompetent and/or ignorant. I would estimate 80% of that small segment are men, roughly the same as the percentage of men in my total interactions. I'm pretty sure concluding men are incompetent and ignorant would be incorrect. But you know, those incompetent men, GAH! I'm sure anyone would feel similarly if....they'd developed a bias against an entire group because of a small non-representative segment.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Jun 28, 2018 20:31:37 GMT -5
A small segment of people I've encountered in my profession as a CPA (other CPAs, attorneys, investment brokers, bankers, entrepreneurs, investors) are demonstrably incompetent and/or ignorant. I would estimate 80% of that small segment are men, roughly the same as the percentage of men in my total interactions. I'm pretty sure concluding men are incompetent and ignorant would be incorrect. But you know, those incompetent men. GAH! I'm sure anyone would feel similarly if....they'd developed a bias against an entire group because of a small segment. I'd truly appreciate if you could please point to me where I expressed a "bias against an entire group of people because of a small segment." Because I thought that I was quite clear in establishing that I was only speaking about the small segment. Maybe not, though? I suppose I should ask which "entire group" you're referring to? I can only assume that perhaps you mean far-leftists? Can't be that, because "far-leftists" is already a small segment of a larger group. I guess if we narrow it down further, maybe you meant far-leftist professors? Or, if we narrow it down even more, maybe you meant far-leftist professors who post hateful, politically-charged garbage on social media that is so inflammatory it makes national headlines? Oh, wait. No, that can't be what you mean, because that's what I said. And, if that's the group you mean, then that would indicate that we agree, but clearly we don't since you're making snide, passive-aggressive accusations rather than just clearly and directly stating your actual claim. If it helps, let me point you to all the places in my posts where I precisely indicated that it was a specific subsection of people I was referring to, and not "an entire group:" Hmm...that seems quite specific. Given how specific it is (i.e., college/university profs...political ideology...have made headlines), it's clear that I'm not expressing bias against an entire group (other than the very small group I specified, I suppose, but we know that's not what you meant) such as all far-leftists or all college professors or even all far-leftist college professors. So, this must not be the place you believe I was biased against an "entire group," because if it was then your claim would be weak, empty, and false. Guess we should look at other things I said here: Again, I was pretty specific in saying that this type of behavior in THESE TYPES OF INCIDENTS (there's that darn specificity again) is MOSTLY (meaning, not completely) on one side of the political aisle. Well, seems I was quite specific here too, so this also can't be what you mean, unless you were making a completely unsupported claim. Strike two! How about... Well, lookie there. More examples of me using qualifiers to indicate a specific group of people. I even added letters to indicate each of the qualifiers I used in that one sentence to indicate specificity. Strike three, you're out. Nice try, though. (okay, it really wasn't. It was actually quite weak).
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 28, 2018 21:10:22 GMT -5
Let's review: An interesting observation: think back to (or Google) all the incidents of college/university profs and instructors saying or doing horrible, hateful things motivated by their political ideology that have made headlines over the past 2 or 3 years. Now count how many of them were conservative and how many of them were liberal (if you're able to find more than one conservative, I'll be really surprised). This type of garbage behavior seems to be mostly on one side of the aisle for these types of incidents in the current climate. You can draw your own conclusions. I just think that's interesting. What conclusion were you wanting people to draw here? What was interesting? That liberal professors have a higher incidence of bad political acts than conservative professors do? Not interesting. No mystery other than the one you apparently want people to surmise from insufficient data. It was more of a comment on the current extreme histrionics of several on the far left, many of whom work happen to work in academia. The ones who have watched The Last Jedi too many times and now feel that they, too, are part of some sort of "Resistance," and apparently that means that some of them feel they have to lash out like overly emotional toddlers having meltdowns and throwing tantrums. And, that's another difference I see between the far right and far left. Ultra-conservatives turn their anger into mobilization and they get shit done (often very horrible shit). Ultra-lefties wail, caterwaul, and have conniption fits instead. Ultimately, they achieve nothing for their cause and in some cases actually damage the brand. But, they publicly pat themselves on the back and exchange social media high-fives while totally oblivious to the fact that they accomplished nothing but reputational damage. #Resistance Academics/scholars are often viewed as reasonable intellectuals (ha, if people only knew the truth), so when some of them do ridiculous shit like this, I feel it gives the rest of us a bad name. It's a lot like having a family member who is a constant fuck up. You want them to do well, but they keep finding ways to let you down and embarrass the whole family. Here's where it gets fleshed out. We're not actually talking about liberal profs doing horrible, hateful things like doxxing. This is about "the far left," a tired hobby horse of liberal-hate, because, I assume, it brings some joy or relief from some sort of workaday suffering. "The left" isn't this, at all, but conservatives put us in the very basket described here, and this sort of rhetoric helps them do that. Which is why, since you are an intelligent, well-spoken, liberally-minded person, I get so fucking irritated at your obsession with this. You don't think other liberals get irritated with extremists? They do. The vast fucking majority do, I'll bet my house. Extremists are a very small (though frustratingly attention-seeking) minority. People harping and hating because it makes them feel good to vent their spleen is just fanning the flames, and it's not an honest assessment of what's going on with the left. And saying "but I'm *only* talking about the far left" (which I do not believe you are, as I think you view the far left as most of the left, but I'll take your word for it) begs the question - WHY? What is the point of regularly bashing a small, non-representative segment of a group you are, as far as I know, still a member of?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jun 29, 2018 8:36:56 GMT -5
Which is why, since you are an intelligent, well-spoken, liberally-minded person, I get so fucking irritated at your obsession with this. You don't think other liberals get irritated with extremists? They do. The vast fucking majority do, I'll bet my house. Extremists are a very small (though frustratingly attention-seeking) minority. People harping and hating because it makes them feel good to vent their spleen is just fanning the flames, and it's not an honest assessment of what's going on with the left. And saying "but I'm *only* talking about the far left" (which I do not believe you are, as I think you view the far left as most of the left, but I'll take your word for it) begs the question - WHY? What is the point of regularly bashing a small, non-representative segment of a group you are, as far as I know, still a member of? I won't answer for Opty, but speaking for myself, while the worst extremists may indeed be a tiny fringe, the fact that they dominate so much of online discourse and so many activist spaces mean they have essentially become the public face of liberalism. And they aren't just providing point-and-laugh fodder for conservatives, but also driving out moderates. Like, there was a time when I would have considered myself sympathetic to feminism, movements like BLM, etc. Now? Not so much. It isn't that I disagree with the core principles (women are people, black lives matter, yes, duh) but that those movements have pretty clearly identified me as an enemy. If I raise a leftist flag and grovel sufficiently for the sin of my white male privilege, I might be allowed to claim "ally" status, so long as I remain mindful that that status can be revoked and I will be fed to the wolves the moment I step out of line. Or, I can just say "Fuck that, I am not getting involved with or supporting you people." The other effect of SJWs is that they are actively trying to dismantle free speech. By that, I do not mean "Boo hoo, I'm not allowed to say racist and sexist things anymore without social consequences." I mean - I truly believe that most of these people (by which I mean the "extremists" we are talking about) in their heart of hearts would literally like to criminalize thoughtcrimes if it were possible, and if it's not they'll get as close as they can. And while that extremist fringe might never have that power, their pervasive influence that makes dissent unacceptable, the "call out culture" that narrows the window of what anyone who cares to remain in their good graces is permitted to express, is affecting mainstream liberalism, not just the campus fringes. It is affecting scientific journals, it is affecting charities and media outlets, it is affecting the government. You see it as meanies like me and Opty taking cheap shots at leftist college kids - but I think it's serious enough to merit scorn and active pushback. I know you also think there are much more serious threats (like, say, Donald Trump) and I don't disagree, but we can be opposed to more than one thing at a time, y'know?
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jun 29, 2018 9:58:15 GMT -5
Which is why, since you are an intelligent, well-spoken, liberally-minded person, I get so fucking irritated at your obsession with this. You don't think other liberals get irritated with extremists? They do. The vast fucking majority do, I'll bet my house. Extremists are a very small (though frustratingly attention-seeking) minority. People harping and hating because it makes them feel good to vent their spleen is just fanning the flames, and it's not an honest assessment of what's going on with the left. And saying "but I'm *only* talking about the far left" (which I do not believe you are, as I think you view the far left as most of the left, but I'll take your word for it) begs the question - WHY? What is the point of regularly bashing a small, non-representative segment of a group you are, as far as I know, still a member of? I won't answer for Opty, but speaking for myself, while the worst extremists may indeed be a tiny fringe, the fact that they dominate so much of online discourse and so many activist spaces mean they have essentially become the public face of liberalism. And they aren't just providing point-and-laugh fodder for conservatives, but also driving out moderates. Like, there was a time when I would have considered myself sympathetic to feminism, movements like BLM, etc. Now? Not so much. It isn't that I disagree with the core principles (women are people, black lives matter, yes, duh) but that those movements have pretty clearly identified me as an enemy. If I raise a leftist flag and grovel sufficiently for the sin of my white male privilege, I might be allowed to claim "ally" status, so long as I remain mindful that that status can be revoked and I will be fed to the wolves the moment I step out of line. Or, I can just say "Fuck that, I am not getting involved with or supporting you people." The other effect of SJWs is that they are actively trying to dismantle free speech. By that, I do not mean "Boo hoo, I'm not allowed to say racist and sexist things anymore without social consequences." I mean - I truly believe that most of these people (by which I mean the "extremists" we are talking about) in their heart of hearts would literally like to criminalize thoughtcrimes if it were possible, and if it's not they'll get as close as they can. And while that extremist fringe might never have that power, their pervasive influence that makes dissent unacceptable, the "call out culture" that narrows the window of what anyone who cares to remain in their good graces is permitted to express, is affecting mainstream liberalism, not just the campus fringes. It is affecting scientific journals, it is affecting charities and media outlets, it is affecting the government. You see it as meanies like me and Opty taking cheap shots at leftist college kids - but I think it's serious enough to merit scorn and active pushback. I know you also think there are much more serious threats (like, say, Donald Trump) and I don't disagree, but we can be opposed to more than one thing at a time, y'know? I agree that some of these specific criticisms are valid, but I disagree that this is the face of liberalism. There are so many upstanding, normal, moderate liberals – politicians, celebrities, journalists, scientists, etc. – including our last President, who was very vocal about, e.g., not suppressing free speech. But if you are right, if extremists on social media really are the face of liberalism, what’s the best course of action? Mock and deride them along with Trumpers? I mean, is it the batshit crazies’ fault, or is it ours too, because we are capable of ignoring them and speaking up as rational people (which, I see all the time on social media, by the way, so I don’t get how extremists are all people see). Do past insults and hurt feelings and grudges help to keep the focus on these people? If so, I sympathetically, kindly suggest to everyone out there feeling this way that they get the hell over it. Those people aren’t worth it. Dismiss them, rather than add fuel to the dumpster fire. I mean, if you are actually being affected by extremist rhetoric, or if you are legitimately concerned about SJWs taking over the world or higher education or whatever, I get that and agree it’s the right thing to say, “Hey, that’s extreme. That’s not right or helpful. This is why.” And I dare say most people will agree with you. But, many times, I think ignoring the alt-left fringe is the smarter option. Like how conservatives don’t seem to spend half their time addressing, let alone mocking, the alt-right.
|
|