Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Power of Being 'Offended' in Order to Shut Down Political Debate
2 views
Skip to first unread message
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Apr 22, 2013, 1:05:54 AM4/22/13
to
The Power of Being “Offended” in Order to Shut Down
Political Debate
By Rachel Alexander
Townhall
townhall.com
April 22, 2013
Has society really become quite thin-skinned, or is
acting “offended” a new tactic that is being used to shut
down legitimate political debate? Progressives are
increasingly claiming to be offended whenever those on
the right disagree with their left-wing positions. It
doesn't matter what the issue is; the left will divert a
legitimate political debate into an accusation that the
right disagrees with them because they are full of hate
towards them. This puts the right on the defensive, and
removes the real debate from discussion. It then becomes
difficult for the right to ever prevail with their
position, because to do so would mean “hate” had won.
Economics? Disagree with welfare, and you're full of hate
and intolerance towards the poor. Social issues? Disagree
with the left on abortion or gay marriage, and you don't
like women or gays. Foreign policy? Disagree on foreign
policy, and you hate Muslims, Palestinians, and the poor
in less fortunate countries. Second Amendment? If you
support gun rights, then you have a cold and callous view
towards the victims of gun violence. Affirmative action?
If you disagree with affirmative action, then you're a
racist. Unions? Disagree with them, and you despise
working-class Americans.
The offended attitude ploy has become stifling. The left
has brainwashed thousands of people across the country
into seeking out chances to be offended. Meanwhile, these
same people who act hysterically offended by a differing
political view will pay $90 to attend a comedy show,
laughing the hardest of anyone at the comedian's racist,
misogynist, and obscene jokes. This is evidence they're
not really offended by those who merely harbor different
political positions on issues.
Continues at:
http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2013/04/22/the-power-of-being-offended-in-order-to-shut-down-political-debate-n1574026/page/full/
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.jai-maharaj
Political Debate
By Rachel Alexander
Townhall
townhall.com
April 22, 2013
Has society really become quite thin-skinned, or is
acting “offended” a new tactic that is being used to shut
down legitimate political debate? Progressives are
increasingly claiming to be offended whenever those on
the right disagree with their left-wing positions. It
doesn't matter what the issue is; the left will divert a
legitimate political debate into an accusation that the
right disagrees with them because they are full of hate
towards them. This puts the right on the defensive, and
removes the real debate from discussion. It then becomes
difficult for the right to ever prevail with their
position, because to do so would mean “hate” had won.
Economics? Disagree with welfare, and you're full of hate
and intolerance towards the poor. Social issues? Disagree
with the left on abortion or gay marriage, and you don't
like women or gays. Foreign policy? Disagree on foreign
policy, and you hate Muslims, Palestinians, and the poor
in less fortunate countries. Second Amendment? If you
support gun rights, then you have a cold and callous view
towards the victims of gun violence. Affirmative action?
If you disagree with affirmative action, then you're a
racist. Unions? Disagree with them, and you despise
working-class Americans.
The offended attitude ploy has become stifling. The left
has brainwashed thousands of people across the country
into seeking out chances to be offended. Meanwhile, these
same people who act hysterically offended by a differing
political view will pay $90 to attend a comedy show,
laughing the hardest of anyone at the comedian's racist,
misogynist, and obscene jokes. This is evidence they're
not really offended by those who merely harbor different
political positions on issues.
Continues at:
http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2013/04/22/the-power-of-being-offended-in-order-to-shut-down-political-debate-n1574026/page/full/
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.jai-maharaj
Sir Fred M. McNeill
Apr 22, 2013, 2:37:50 AM4/22/13
to
Dare
Apr 22, 2013, 9:05:49 AM4/22/13
to
"use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)" wrote in message news:20130421Ku5ByXo97t@QyDK...
I don't understand why this technique works.
Just because what is said offends someone doesn't
necessarily mean what was said is wrong or harmful.
Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
Just because what is said offends someone doesn't
necessarily mean what was said is wrong or harmful.
Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
Bret Cahill
Apr 22, 2013, 9:29:08 AM4/22/13
to
> Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
censors themselves.
Bret Cahill
David Hartung
Apr 22, 2013, 9:40:46 AM4/22/13
to
Dare
Apr 22, 2013, 9:52:00 AM4/22/13
to
"Bret Cahill" <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ed125a72-a536-4d43...@ka6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
Do some _want_ to be...or at least want to feel as if they are...."persecuted"?
Is that the only argument they have to offer in response to what was said?
Are they afraid what was said is true....or would be a practical and
beneficial policy...and thereby weaken there position?
Why wouldn't critical thinking and discussion about what was said
be more effective at discrediting the "offensive" statements?
>> Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
>
> Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> censors themselves.
But why does it work?....
>
> Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> censors themselves.
Do some _want_ to be...or at least want to feel as if they are...."persecuted"?
Is that the only argument they have to offer in response to what was said?
Are they afraid what was said is true....or would be a practical and
beneficial policy...and thereby weaken there position?
Why wouldn't critical thinking and discussion about what was said
be more effective at discrediting the "offensive" statements?
Dare
Apr 22, 2013, 10:55:15 AM4/22/13
to
"Dare" <clyd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:kl3f4e$v47$1...@dont-email.me...
> thereby weaken there position?
should be(of course):
thereby weaken _their_ position.
(sorry)
> "Bret Cahill" <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ed125a72-a536-4d43...@ka6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
correction:
> thereby weaken there position?
should be(of course):
thereby weaken _their_ position.
(sorry)
Jope
Apr 22, 2013, 8:07:09 PM4/22/13
to
On Apr 22, 1:05 am, use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr.
> http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2013/04/22/the-power-o...
Disagree with shooting unarmed Mexicans on the border, and you are
called a pinko liberal.
Disagree with letting people starve to death in a country where people
are throwing food away, and you are called a Marxist Leninist.
Disagree with idea that the economy is doing worse than for years
ago,and you are called a dumb liberal.
And on and on...
Disagree with shooting unarmed Mexicans on the border, and you are
called a pinko liberal.
Disagree with letting people starve to death in a country where people
are throwing food away, and you are called a Marxist Leninist.
Disagree with idea that the economy is doing worse than for years
ago,and you are called a dumb liberal.
And on and on...
Bret Cahill
Apr 23, 2013, 2:19:03 AM4/23/13
to
> >> Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
>
> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> > censors themselves.
>
> But why does it work?....
Because once they find out you are a hypocrite you're ignored.
>
> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> > censors themselves.
>
> But why does it work?....
If they sincerely supported free speech they might get some traction
whining.
But they don't.
Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
Apr 23, 2013, 2:44:16 AM4/23/13
to
> > The Power of Being “Offended” in Order to Shut Down
> > Political Debate
>
> > By Rachel Alexander
> > Townhall
> > townhall.com
> > April 22, 2013
>
> > Has society really become quite thin-skinned, or is
> > acting “offended” a new tactic that is being used to shut
> > down legitimate political debate?
. . .
> > Political Debate
>
> > By Rachel Alexander
> > Townhall
> > townhall.com
> > April 22, 2013
>
> > Has society really become quite thin-skinned, or is
> > acting “offended” a new tactic that is being used to shut
> > down legitimate political debate?
> > The offended attitude ploy has become stifling. The left
> > has brainwashed thousands of people across the country
> > into seeking out chances to be offended. Meanwhile, these
> > same people who act hysterically offended by a differing
> > political view will pay $90 to attend a comedy show,
> > laughing the hardest of anyone at the comedian's racist,
> > misogynist, and obscene jokes. This is evidence they're
> > not really offended by those who merely harbor different
> > political positions on issues.
>
> > Continues at:
>
> >http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2013/04/22/the-power-o...
>
> > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > Om Shanti
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.jai-maharaj
>
> Disagree with shooting unarmed Mexicans on the border, and you are
> called a pinko liberal.
> Disagree with letting people starve to death in a country where people
> are throwing food away, and you are called a Marxist Leninist.
> Disagree with idea that the economy is doing worse than for years
> ago,and you are called a dumb liberal.
> And on and on...
"Does free speech precede each and every free trade?"
If they don't care enough about free speech (or free markets) to
answer The Question, then any whining about censorship "by being
offended" or any other method is going to fall flat.
Republicans resent Democrats doing slightly better than Republicans on
"being nice," however they should consider themselves lucky that the
Dems only toss bones to the impoverished and don't adopt James
Madison's standard, "justice is the end of government."
If that ever happened not only would the GOP vanish but it would take
the legacy media with it.
And no one knows this better than the legacy media.
Bret Cahill
Dare
Apr 23, 2013, 10:12:50 AM4/23/13
to
"Bret Cahill" <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:a535688b-e93d-4632...@tz3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
(from OP)
>> >> Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
>>
>> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
>> > censors themselves.
>>
>> But why does it work?....
>
> Because once they find out you are a hypocrite you're ignored.
What about the hypocrisy of false "offense":
>>
>> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
>> > censors themselves.
>>
>> But why does it work?....
>
> Because once they find out you are a hypocrite you're ignored.
(from OP)
Bret Cahill
Apr 23, 2013, 1:13:06 PM4/23/13
to
> >> >> Why does it seem to work as a form of censorship?
>
> >> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> >> > censors themselves.
>
> >> But why does it work?....
>
> > Because once they find out you are a hypocrite you're ignored.
>
> What about the hypocrisy of false "offense":
What's the hypocrisy as far as censorship is concerned? Are the
>
> >> > Mostly because the ones whining about the censorship are wanna be
> >> > censors themselves.
>
> >> But why does it work?....
>
> > Because once they find out you are a hypocrite you're ignored.
>
> What about the hypocrisy of false "offense":
Democrats also claiming that they are being censored?
It looks like the GOP lost the popular debate and has no response
other than they were somehow censored. Maybe I missed something. Did
the Obama gummint step in with a bunch of lawyers and censor something
important the GOP needed to get out to the American people?
Hasn't everyone already heard that you can get rich quick by
supporting GOP tax cuts for the rich?
> (from OP)
> " Meanwhile, these same people who act hysterically offended
> by a differing political view will pay $90 to attend a comedy show,
> laughing the hardest of anyone at the comedian's racist, misogynist,
> and obscene jokes."
chuckle at the openly and sincerely racist "Patriot Games" Milby just
about everytime I see his middle school level emotional development
spam. That doesn't mean I agree with him. For years I assumed he was
just a false flaging Democrat -- something else I do not condone --
trying to make the GOP look bad.
Moreover, things have loosened up a little with a black president.
Black sensitities aren't what they used to be.
Finally the proof is in the pudding. These same "laughing Democrats"
-- assuming they even exist -- send money to black candidates,
fraternize with latinos and support women's rights in legal actions.
This doesn't mean the Democrats are using the most devastating weapon
against the GOP. To the contrary the legacy media gush "it's a horse
race" every 4 years to brainwash the public into believing
competitions in ideas are and should be like competitive track and
field events. They are trying to "merely omit" the fact that
Jefferson obliterated the conservatives of his day just as the word
processor obliterated the typewriter. Competitions in political ideas
and technology aren't and should rarely be horse races in a vibrant
democracy. The Princetion stats group exposed Gallup's "hore race"
polls which could easily be predicted to be scam by the analysis
above.
In other words Democrats could downsize the GOP to Libertarian Party
levels overnight by doing a bit more than just presenting themselves
as the "being nice" party.
"Being nice" isn't the end of government.
As James Madison wrote, "justice is the end of government."
Economic justice -- the only justice of concern back then -- is a
whole lot more popular than getting an insulting bone tossed your
way. It would level wealth immediately. On the down side for many
Democratic Party movers and shakers this would return the trial
lawyers and the "liberal" legacy media to the productive sector.
And no one knows this better than the legacy media.
this event, hyping culture wars like there's no tomorrow, Jerry
Springerizing the political debate and gushing "it's a horse
race . . ." every 4 years.
They legacy media know their fortunes are tied to the GOP. After all,
they all git their cornpone from the very same 0.01%.
Bret Cahill
0 new messages