Has political correctness actually gone mad?

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
23,789
Sorry Siorac, I don't agree. I feel like I stand for plenty and I like to think centrists are actually realists who understand the need for compromise. The world is a complicated place and one single vision (left or right) will not work for everyone. We are in a serious 'Thought Police' age where both sides are trying to bend the will of the other to match it's own instead of trying to forge a path that works in some semblance for both.
That's nice but in a lot of issues, there is no "compromise" or a "path that works for both". Let me illustrate with an admittedly extreme example.

If one side says all blue-eyed people should be exterminated and the other side says no blue-eyed people should be exterminated then what is the centrist solution, what is the compromise? Kill only half of them? Don't kill any but maim them for life or enslave them?

Or, to bring a real life example, look at the American Civil War. Imagine an abolitionist who believes that owning people is wrong. For them, a compromise that says owning "some people in certain places" is OK is not acceptable. There is no compromise to be had there.

Just the way I see it. From my point of view the far left are no better in some respects than the far right. Totally intolerant and aggressive.
This is from the US but then most of the examples of extreme PC in this thread come from there, too: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...rists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/

The extreme left are mean to people on the internet. The extreme right commit terrorist acts.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
23,789
Yeah, what has ever been achieved in politics by trying to find some common ground between opposing viewpoints?
To try to achieve a compromise, you first need to have a viewpoint. If you are a centrist whose sole political view is "we should all love each other" that's worthless. It's great for living your everyday life though so there's that.

Saying that "we need to find the common ground" is the politics equivalent of a football fan saying "we need more desire and passion!!!". It's meaningless. Compromise is to be had on specific issues, and only if those issues are not core to someone's value system. A die-hard fundamentalist evangelical is not going to compromise on abortion. They have to be beaten at the elections to make sure they don't get to influence policy. And for that, you need to stand for something.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
To try to achieve a compromise, you first need to have a viewpoint. If you are a centrist whose sole political view is "we should all love each other" that's worthless. It's great for living your everyday life though so there's that.

Saying that "we need to find the common ground" is the politics equivalent of a football fan saying "we need more desire and passion!!!". It's meaningless. Compromise is to be had on specific issues, and only if those issues are not core to someone's value system. A die-hard fundamentalist evangelical is not going to compromise on abortion. They have to be beaten at the elections to make sure they don't get to influence policy. And for that, you need to stand for something.
Google “The Good Friday Agreement” if you want to learn about what can be achieved when two sets of people, with diametrically opposed - and entrenched - political opinions try to find some common ground.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
Yeah, what has ever been achieved in politics by trying to find some common ground between opposing viewpoints?
I'll no doubt get slaughtered for this (I'm wishing I stayed in the saftey of the transfer thread) but Tony Blair was on to something at the start of his tenure in no10. I was in my 20's and could remember the Tory years before and that guy got the balance right. He sat pretty comfortably in that middle ground and for a while this country wasn't, or at least didn't feel so divided.

Obviously his legacy is tarnished now but he was truly a modern politician, which is something that cannot be said for either Boris or JC and since TB our politics have taken a massive step backwards at a time where it needs to be looking forwards.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
Google “The Good Friday Agreement” if you want to learn about what can be achieved when two sets of people, with diametrically opposed - and entrenched - political opinions try to find some common ground.
Perfect. I manage a large team at work. Some of them really don't get on. Talking is always the key not name calling and aggression.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
10,211
Location
Loughborough university
The far right are worse because they pose a legitimate terrorist threat, in the UK at least. There's no real left equivalent to that. They certainly can be bloody irritating though.
Yep. Theres no comparison here. One side is angry because they are racist, sexiest, bigoted and terrorists. The other side just shows how much they hate that particular side.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
To try to achieve a compromise, you first need to have a viewpoint. If you are a centrist whose sole political view is "we should all love each other" that's worthless. It's great for living your everyday life though so there's that.
That's rubbish. We can't all love each other but what you're saying is that we shouldn't accept there 'may be a way' to move forward. That's as small minded as it is defeatist. Most centrists don't have 'sole political views'. Just realistic thoughts such as maybe some aspects of socialism are great but it doesn't work for our finances. And capitalism may be bad, we actually need some of it to fund socialism. It's all part of the same machine whether people want to accept it or not.

Saying that "we need to find the common ground" is the politics equivalent of a football fan saying "we need more desire and passion!!!". It's meaningless. Compromise is to be had on specific issues, and only if those issues are not core to someone's value system. A die-hard fundamentalist evangelical is not going to compromise on abortion. They have to be beaten at the elections to make sure they don't get to influence policy. And for that, you need to stand for something.
If neither side in any argument is willing to compromise then we're screwed. This is what being a centrist is. I just see a lot of pig headed and obstinate idiots so entrenched on either side they're unable or unwilling to accept that there may just be a solution.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Yep. Theres no comparison here. One side is angry because they are racist, sexiest, bigoted and terrorists. The other side just shows how much they hate that particular side.
This is true. Although the left also has a tendency to turn on each other with just as much anger and scorn as they use against the right.

The trans activists vs TERFs squabbles referenced higher up the thread being an obvious example. The whole intersectional thing also seems to cause regular bunfights, pile-ons and scrambles for moral highground.

I can’t think of any equivalent scenarios on the right (although that might be because I try not to spend any time immersed in right wing social media - too icky)
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
23,789
Google “The Good Friday Agreement” if you want to learn about what can be achieved when two sets of people, with diametrically opposed - and entrenched - political opinions try to find some common ground.
Yeah, great. I never said compromise is impossible or bad. I said, and keep saying, that "we need to find a common ground" and "we need a centrist government" are worthless political viewpoints in themselves. They mean nothing. It's the equivalent of "let's be nice to each other".

It's especially worthless on the context of this thread. Sure, let's compromise on how much the richest in society should be taxed or whether benefits should be means-tested. But if someone believes that homosexuality is a sin and it should be illegal then there's no compromise and common ground to be had. And all too often the cries for compromise come in this context: "we should not call racists racist, we should try to find a solution that works for everyone!".
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
10,211
Location
Loughborough university
This is true. Although the left also has a tendency to turn on each other with just as much anger and scorn as they use against the right.

The trans activists vs TERFs squabbles referenced higher up the thread being an obvious example. The whole intersectional thing also seems to cause regular bunfights, pile-ons and scrambles for moral highground.

I can’t think of any equivalent scenarios on the right (although that might be because I try not to spend any time immersed in right wing social media - too icky)
Yeah agreed. It can get very messy and as you say the the pile-ons especially can be horrible. But nothing the left has done can equal the extremes of the right.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
23,789
Maybe not currently and historically but I've seen it grow and grow into something that is ugly in its own right and if left unchecked how bad will it get in the coming years?
So not now and not ever but maybe in the future the two will be the same if unspecified things occur?

Yeah, they're totally the same then.
 

villain

Hates Beyoncé
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
14,973
Maybe not currently and historically but I've seen it grow and grow into something that is ugly in its own right and if left unchecked how bad will it get in the coming years?
"even though it hasn't happened before, and it's not happening now, what if it ever does happen? what then?!?" :lol:
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
10,211
Location
Loughborough university
Maybe not currently and historically but I've seen it grow and grow into something that is ugly in its own right and if left unchecked how bad will it get in the coming years?
There has always been the right and the left all through history. They have both shared completely different values and it has always been one side that wants to openly hold back and oppress one side, while the other side tries to fight and revolutionise society in a more progressive direction. Modern society has it in the form of social media and advertising and posturing but its always the same concept.

The truth is regardless one side is clearly a worst side morally than the other.
 

Mogget

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
6,520
Supports
Arsenal
Maybe not currently and historically but I've seen it grow and grow into something that is ugly in its own right and if left unchecked how bad will it get in the coming years?
Can you provide examples?
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
24,444
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
Maybe not currently and historically but I've seen it grow and grow into something that is ugly in its own right and if left unchecked how bad will it get in the coming years?
Some rich people might have to sell their 9th house and you might run into a girl dressed as a dude in the men's room. Lord protect us all.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
The truth is regardless one side is clearly a worst side morally than the other.
Of course, I'm not making a direct comparison here as there isn't one. I just worry that the extreme left is getting messier and more angry and the lines between the behaviour of both sides are blurring even if the causes aren't.
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
24,444
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
Why would either of those bother me? I'm neither rich nor bigotted.
No not you, I mean the right in general. The solution is one of two things; either the far right will stop being bigots or the left will stop caring about them being bigots. The problem is on the right. The left's agression is reactionairy.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
35,216
Location
xG Zombie Nation
This is true. Although the left also has a tendency to turn on each other with just as much anger and scorn as they use against the right.

The trans activists vs TERFs squabbles referenced higher up the thread being an obvious example. The whole intersectional thing also seems to cause regular bunfights, pile-ons and scrambles for moral highground.

I can’t think of any equivalent scenarios on the right (although that might be because I try not to spend any time immersed in right wing social media - too icky)
The far right have a lot of infighting which is why you see organisations like the EDL form and then splinter quite quickly before disappearing.

I think the hard left in this country have a similar strategic problem, they have little appetite to reach out to the centre to create a the broad church generally needed to win power (its a little different at the moment with the chaos in British politics), they'd rather those centrist vote for the Tories.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
Can you provide examples?
Of what? The extreme lefts' anger? It's there. The hatred and fury at protests against politicians or anyone who doesn't share their views ...

The far left may well be morally justified in their anger just as much as the far right are completely wrong in their views and beliefs but if neither side show some willingness to get beyond it then we are screwed.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
The problem is on the right. The left's agression is reactionairy.
That doesn't make either side right.

Not all people on the right hold extreme views on race or sexuality. Nor are they rich. Just as not everyone on the left wants to aggressively fight opposing views. There is a bigger middle ground to be had than is currently on offer that's all I'm trying to say.
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
24,444
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
That doesn't make either side right.

Not all people on the right hold extreme views on race or sexuality. Nor are they rich. Just as not everyone on the left wants to aggressively fight opposing views. There is a bigger middle ground to be had than is currently on offer that's all I'm trying to say.
Ah, yes of course, I thought we were talking about the far right and far left. Moderates can find middle ground of course.

Still the far right is inherently far worse than the far left if you ask me. That doesnt mean the far left is universally fantastic. I think far-anything is wrong. Us humans (we humans?) have the ability to look at things in a nuanced manner. We should always do that.
 

Mogget

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
6,520
Supports
Arsenal
Aside from all the genocidal communist governments.

Although I think in modern times when you get a bunch of trans activists following around feminist activists trying to beat them to a pulp ... that's pretty nasty stuff right?

Or all these lovely cuddly socialists holding the Corbyn puppet strings trying to make the party as anti-Jewish as possible, partly to appeal to all those conspiracy theorising marxists, but also because they realise that when it comes to voting blocks, they'd much rather have the Muslims than the Jews on their side. Talk about dominating the moral high ground.
:lol:

Talks about conspiracy theorising Marxists yet in his very next breath..
 

Cheesy

Bread with dipping sauce
Scout
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
36,181
The problem with centrism is that some people like to see it as the only inherently sensible position, filled with rational and level-headed people who would do a great job of running the country if only they were given the chance, unlike the entrenched extremists on the left and right.

But take a gander through Twitter and you'll find that's not the case - many centrists (to use the term broadly) are just as hysterical, ideologically minded and entrenched as their counterparts on the left and right. I sympathise with the wider motivations of a lot of the People's Vote types but a lot of them are incredibly hysterical and over-dramatic at times, no less so than the worst of Corbyn's fans.

A lot of this comes down to Blair - the popular view is often that he was an unprincipled pragmatist who veered to the centre because he had to. That's entirely incorrect, he was a deeply ideological position with a very fixed and entrenched worldview of his own. Whether that ideological was good or not is another debate but he was by no means someone who liked compromise and he wasn't necessarily pragmatic either. He simply did a good job of convincing everyone else he was.
 

Cheesy

Bread with dipping sauce
Scout
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
36,181
Of what? The extreme lefts' anger? It's there. The hatred and fury at protests against politicians or anyone who doesn't share their views ...

The far left may well be morally justified in their anger just as much as the far right are completely wrong in their views and beliefs but if neither side show some willingness to get beyond it then we are screwed.
Being angry and furious though is completely different to actually committing acts of terrorism. You see this a lot when groups like Antifa are compared to the far-right, but the far-rights record when it comes to actually killing people is much, much worse. And you can't try to divorce views of each group for where they're approaching politics - a group of people who are angry at exploitative rich corporations or government figures just aren't as bad as groups who are really annoyed that they can't lynch black people anymore.

Historically the far-left obviously have some absolutely atrocious crimes to answer for when it comes to many communist states etc, but in modern terms people like AOC and Bernie Sanders in the US quite obviously just aren't as bad as far-right Neo-Nazis. And yet there's this weird tendency to equate the increasing confidence of the left with the emboldening of the far-right, in spite of the vastly different nature of the changes on either side.
 

Mogget

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
6,520
Supports
Arsenal
You think voting demographics play no part in Labour's recent lurch into brazen antisemitism?
To clarify, you believe Labour is becoming anti semetic to gain votes from Muslims?
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
27,359
To clarify, you believe Labour is becoming anti semetic to gain votes from Muslims?
No I think the far left of the labour party have always been as they are now. I think the total inaction and lack of concern for the growing prominence of antisemitism once Corbyn was elected was partly down to the (naive) belief that it wasn't actually going to cost them votes.
 

Mogget

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
6,520
Supports
Arsenal
No I think the far left of the labour party have always been as they are now. I think the total inaction and lack of concern for the growing prominence of antisemitism once Corbyn was elected was partly down to the (naive) belief that it wasn't actually going to cost them votes.
What's that got to do with your original comment that Labour would "much rather have the Muslims than the Jews on their side"?
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
27,359
What's that got to do with your original comment that Labour would "much rather have the Muslims than the Jews on their side"?
One of the underlying demographic imbalances that explain why they thought it wouldn't cost them votes. It's one thing to want to exploit pro-Palestinian sentiment in Muslim communities, but it's another to then not care at all in the instances where that sentiment crossed over into anti-Jewish hatred.
 

Mogget

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2013
Messages
6,520
Supports
Arsenal
One of the underlying demographic imbalances that explain why they thought it wouldn't cost them votes. It's one thing to want to exploit pro-Palestinian sentiment in Muslim communities, but it's another to then not care at all in the instances where that sentiment crossed over into anti-Jewish hatred.
Yeah, I don't think you're in any position to be criticising others as conspiracy theorists.
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
24,444
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
Just out of curiosity; is calling Israel a cnutish country for their actions considered anti-semite?
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
10,211
Location
Loughborough university
One of the underlying demographic imbalances that explain why they thought it wouldn't cost them votes. It's one thing to want to exploit pro-Palestinian sentiment in Muslim communities, but it's another to then not care at all in the instances where that sentiment crossed over into anti-Jewish hatred.
Even then no left wing person would agree with that if that is what labour is doing so I don't really see your points. Labour is more left leaning in comparison to the conservatives but absolutely no one believes they an extreme far left group.
 

Reddy Rederson

New Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
3,809
Location
Unicorn Country.
Just out of curiosity; is calling Israel a cnutish country for their actions considered anti-semite?
It doesnt, as obviously talking about the government of a country and its actions is quite different to commenting on the people. But, you just know that someone is waiting with sweaty finger tips ready to pounce, and insert all sorts of shit you didnt actually say, just so they can call you a jew hating nazi **** or something.
 

Fingeredmouse

Full Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2014
Messages
5,632
Location
Glasgow
Sorry, I just need some clarity. Is politics now so fecking skewed that we have a genuine argument that Labour are a hard left Marxist party who are happily fostering anti-semitism to exploit the Muslim voting power base? The benefits if which would, of course, totally outweigh the votes lost by disgusting their left wing, and therefore politically opposed to any form of racism, voting base?

As for centrism: the centre ground in the UK as a whole is now quite right (witness Labour vote collapse in Scotland as UK centre is very right of Scotland centre) and is wholly relative.

Also, whilst compromise is good, it is not exactly clear to me what the middle ground that can be achieved with hard right racists is. It's a pretty entrenched view that doesn't really lend itself to mature debate. I have no doubt people see Corbyn as hard left. He is not to me (although this should not be confused with advocacy). I see the Tories as hard right. They are clearly not to a good chunk of England.

The Good Friday agreement is cited as an example of compromise between two implacable sides. And it is a good example...except that the right are doing everything they can to destroy it, deliberately and through indifference depending upon which party you look at.
 

Shamwow

listens to shit music & watches Mrs Brown's Boys
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
13,969
Location
Spiderpig
At least hobbers has found a form of anti-racism that he can use to peddle his idiotic racist conspiracy theories. Just like the worst of the far left.