Political Correctness

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

The point I was trying to make is that it is no less unreasonable--- for one to expect to not face consequences such as being fired from their job or being called a racist/homophobe/bigot (etc.) if they (especially as a public figure) use racial slurs or make disparaging comments towards LGBTQ or other minorities by the "PC" people ---as it is for me to expect to not face the Secret Service or some other consequence if I use my free speech in a certain way toward the President of the United States.
What's a "threat" can be subjective, and some people in minority groups perceive certain disparaging or insensitive statements to be just as threatening when it comes from high-profile and influential people. For example, it can be statistically proven that there has been a spike in hate crimes against people of certain ethnic backgrounds since Donald Trump has made disparaging comments against Muslims. So is it unreasonable for them to be "PC" about Donald Trump's choice of words?

The major difference is one is about freedom of political views and the other is about physically harming someone. It's really not comparable. And saying let's kill someone isn't the same as saying enforce the laws or stating a factual statement people may not agree with. Some people might say black people are violent, should they be fired? What if it was pc to say that? Then in that case should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism? Slippery slope. *edit* and let's make it clear, there's a distinction between not being pc and using hate speech or being a racists. They're not synonymous with each other.

---------- Post added at 10:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:45 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Nicholas

Well, I guess that ends our conversation. If you're not capable of discussing a subject without this kind of post I'm not going to waste my time.



Oh OK, my mistake. Yeah, I agree of course that is wrong.

I understand what you're saying but I am going to call you a pedant as whilst a fascist regime might not inherently be tied to discrimination it is characteristic of those in recent history. Also, Nazi Germany seems like a bad example to use. It was a very racist regime as well as anti-semitic.

That's my 100% honest definition. It's bullshit. And a joke honestly. Btw you've said nothing in 6 comments we were done long ago homie.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

The point I was trying to make is that it is no less unreasonable--- for one to expect to not face consequences such as being fired from their job or being called a racist/homophobe/bigot (etc.) if they (especially as a public figure) use racial slurs or make disparaging comments towards LGBTQ or other minorities by the "PC" people ---as it is for me to expect to not face the Secret Service or some other consequence if I use my free speech in a certain way toward the President of the United States.
What's a "threat" can be subjective, and some people in minority groups perceive certain disparaging or insensitive statements to be just as threatening when it comes from high-profile and influential people. For example, it can be statistically proven that there has been a spike in hate crimes against people of certain ethnic backgrounds since Donald Trump has made disparaging comments against Muslims. So is it unreasonable for them to be "PC" about Donald Trump's choice of words?

The major difference is one is about freedom of political views and the other is about physically harming someone. It's really not comparable. And saying let's kill someone isn't the same as saying enforce the laws or stating a factual statement people may not agree with. Some people might say black people are violent, should they be fired? What if it was pc to say that? Then in that case should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism? Slippery slope. *edit* and let's make it clear, there's a distinction between not being pc and using hate speech or being a racists. They're not synonymous with each other.

---------- Post added at 10:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:45 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Nicholas

Well, I guess that ends our conversation. If you're not capable of discussing a subject without this kind of post I'm not going to waste my time.



Oh OK, my mistake. Yeah, I agree of course that is wrong.

I understand what you're saying but I am going to call you a pedant as whilst a fascist regime might not inherently be tied to discrimination it is characteristic of those in recent history. Also, Nazi Germany seems like a bad example to use. It was a very racist regime as well as anti-semitic.

That's my 100% honest definition. It's bullshit. And a joke honestly. Btw you've said nothing in 6 comments we were done long ago homie.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

The major difference is one is about freedom of political views and the other is about physically harming someone. It's really not comparable. And saying let's kill someone isn't the same as saying enforce the laws or stating a factual statement people may not agree with. Some people might say black people are violent, should they be fired? What if it was pc to say that? Then in that case should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism? Slippery slope.[COLOR="Silver"]

Saying Donald Trump should be assassinated is also a political view on top of being about harming someone, and saying "black people are violent" could lead to harm on top of being a political view (refer to the example I gave about Donald Trump's statements about "Islamic radicalism" and spikes in hate crimes against people who "look Muslim"). "Should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism" is an interesting question, because recently, people have tried to link Black Lives Matter and people protesting against police racism---to incidents of cops getting killed. If the viewpoint that the two are related becomes popular enough, we may very well see black people getting fired in the future for making such claims about systemic racism which could be viewed as incendiary.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

The major difference is one is about freedom of political views and the other is about physically harming someone. It's really not comparable. And saying let's kill someone isn't the same as saying enforce the laws or stating a factual statement people may not agree with. Some people might say black people are violent, should they be fired? What if it was pc to say that? Then in that case should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism? Slippery slope.[COLOR="Silver"]

Saying Donald Trump should be assassinated is also a political view on top of being about harming someone, and saying "black people are violent" could lead to harm on top of being a political view (refer to the example I gave about Donald Trump's statements about "Islamic radicalism" and spikes in hate crimes against people who "look Muslim"). "Should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism" is an interesting question, because recently, people have tried to link Black Lives Matter and people protesting against police racism---to incidents of cops getting killed. If the viewpoint that the two are related becomes popular enough, we may very well see black people getting fired in the future for making such claims about systemic racism which could be viewed as incendiary.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

Saying Donald Trump should be assassinated is also a political view on top of being about harming someone, and saying "black people are violent" could lead to harm on top of being a political view (refer to the example I gave about Donald Trump's statements about "Islamic radicalism" and spikes in hate crimes against people who "look Muslim"). "Should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism" is an interesting question, because recently, people have tried to link Black Lives Matter and people protesting against police racism---to incidents of cops getting killed. If the viewpoint that the two are related becomes popular enough, we may very well see black people getting fired in the future for making such claims about systemic racism which could be viewed as incendiary.

There hasn't been a rise in crime but a rise in reports of crimes against muslims but most are later proven to be hoaxes.

Second, not being politically correct means you don't adhere to what most deem to be acceptable terms and or definitions when speaking your points of view. It doesn't mean you're racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent isn't politically correct and may be wrong but one could make that argument with the use of facts. And someone could opposingly argue it's a systemic problem causing the violence in the inner cities. But saying to kill someone is just inciting violence. Pc just paints one argument as being morally superior to the other. We could argue all day on which examples are better but nonetheless you will always try and start off with the moral high ground attached to your side. "You don't hate minorities and women right? Well then you must agree with me".

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

Saying Donald Trump should be assassinated is also a political view on top of being about harming someone, and saying "black people are violent" could lead to harm on top of being a political view (refer to the example I gave about Donald Trump's statements about "Islamic radicalism" and spikes in hate crimes against people who "look Muslim"). "Should a black person be fired for saying there's systemic racism" is an interesting question, because recently, people have tried to link Black Lives Matter and people protesting against police racism---to incidents of cops getting killed. If the viewpoint that the two are related becomes popular enough, we may very well see black people getting fired in the future for making such claims about systemic racism which could be viewed as incendiary.

There hasn't been a rise in crime but a rise in reports of crimes against muslims but most are later proven to be hoaxes.

Second, not being politically correct means you don't adhere to what most deem to be acceptable terms and or definitions when speaking your points of view. It doesn't mean you're racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent isn't politically correct and may be wrong but one could make that argument with the use of facts. And someone could opposingly argue it's a systemic problem causing the violence in the inner cities. But saying to kill someone is just inciting violence. Pc just paints one argument as being morally superior to the other. We could argue all day on which examples are better but nonetheless you will always try and start off with the moral high ground attached to your side. "You don't hate minorities and women right? Well then you must agree with me".

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

There hasn't been a rise in crime but a rise in reports of crimes against muslims but most are later proven to be hoxes.

Second, not being politically correct means you don't adhere to what most deem to be acceptable terms and or definitions when speaking your points of view. It doesn't mean you're racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent isn't politically correct and may be wrong but one could make that argument with the use of facts. And someone could opposingly argue it's a systemic problem causing the violence in the inner cities. But saying to kill someone is just inciting violence. Pc just paints one argument as being morally superior to the other. We could argue all day on which examples are better but nonetheless you will always try and start off with the moral high ground attached to your side. "You don't hate minorities and women right? Well then you must agree with me".

Post by ???.

When police departments such as the NYPD have themselves reported that there have been an increase in both the number of hate crimes being reported and the number of hate crimes actually taking place, I'll take their word for it over yours. While it's true that some hate crime reports have been found to be hoaxes, I don't know how you conclude that "most" were hoaxes.
I never said not being politically correct implies you are racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent is a generalization, and a parochial one at that. You will definitely find many black neighborhoods that are violent, but nonetheless not ALL black neighborhoods are violent. If I could point out some violent white neighborhoods, would it be fair for me to say "white neighborhoods are violent", implying that anywhere where white people live is violent?

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

There hasn't been a rise in crime but a rise in reports of crimes against muslims but most are later proven to be hoxes.

Second, not being politically correct means you don't adhere to what most deem to be acceptable terms and or definitions when speaking your points of view. It doesn't mean you're racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent isn't politically correct and may be wrong but one could make that argument with the use of facts. And someone could opposingly argue it's a systemic problem causing the violence in the inner cities. But saying to kill someone is just inciting violence. Pc just paints one argument as being morally superior to the other. We could argue all day on which examples are better but nonetheless you will always try and start off with the moral high ground attached to your side. "You don't hate minorities and women right? Well then you must agree with me".

Post by ???.

When police departments such as the NYPD have themselves reported that there have been an increase in both the number of hate crimes being reported and the number of hate crimes actually taking place, I'll take their word for it over yours. While it's true that some hate crime reports have been found to be hoaxes, I don't know how you conclude that "most" were hoaxes.
I never said not being politically correct implies you are racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent is a generalization, and a parochial one at that. You will definitely find many black neighborhoods that are violent, but nonetheless not ALL black neighborhoods are violent. If I could point out some violent white neighborhoods, would it be fair for me to say "white neighborhoods are violent", implying that anywhere where white people live is violent?

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

Post by ???.

When police departments such as the NYPD have themselves reported that there have been an increase in both the number of hate crimes being reported and the number of hate crimes actually taking place, I'll take their word for it over yours. While it's true that some hate crime reports have been found to be hoaxes, I don't know how you conclude that "most" were hoaxes.
I never said not being politically correct implies you are racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent is a generalization, and a parochial one at that. You will definitely find many black neighborhoods that are violent, but nonetheless not ALL black neighborhoods are violent. If I could point out some violent white neighborhoods, would it be fair for me to say "white neighborhoods are violent", implying that anywhere where white people live is violent?

Please link me actual cases of hate crimes, where there's an arrest. Not pictures of swastikas. I'm not impressed. And funny you take NYPD statistics hook, line and sinker when trying to make a point but then would argue that blacks and minorities are targeted by police. Which is it? Are the police targeting blacks or are they a trusted organization which one can blindly believe all the facts they report? It seems you pick and choose when to find a source credible or not. Besides, I've read at least 20 hate crime hoaxes. I've been to prison and know what real white supremacist shit looks like. And most the media reports look fake af. There becomes a point when you have to question the incidents being reported. Especially, when there's an obvious inclination for people to do the crimes themselves... They can do what ever they want and blame it on the evil white man. I grew up in violent neighborhoods and have been jumped a few times for being white, the reverse almost never happens nowadays. Also, I can go in some of the worst Hispanic and Black neighborhoods cuz I speak from an Og's perspective. Black neighborhoods are "generally" more dangerous. But that's not the arguement, which you avoid. The argument is that us discussing black neighborhoods being violent means one argument is seen as morally wrong even though it's factually right. And the other, morally right while it's factually wrong. Because leftist use pc to demonize, alienate and stifle debate and points of view that differ from their own.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Swagga Lee

Post by ???.

When police departments such as the NYPD have themselves reported that there have been an increase in both the number of hate crimes being reported and the number of hate crimes actually taking place, I'll take their word for it over yours. While it's true that some hate crime reports have been found to be hoaxes, I don't know how you conclude that "most" were hoaxes.
I never said not being politically correct implies you are racist. Saying black neighborhoods are violent is a generalization, and a parochial one at that. You will definitely find many black neighborhoods that are violent, but nonetheless not ALL black neighborhoods are violent. If I could point out some violent white neighborhoods, would it be fair for me to say "white neighborhoods are violent", implying that anywhere where white people live is violent?

Please link me actual cases of hate crimes, where there's an arrest. Not pictures of swastikas. I'm not impressed. And funny you take NYPD statistics hook, line and sinker when trying to make a point but then would argue that blacks and minorities are targeted by police. Which is it? Are the police targeting blacks or are they a trusted organization which one can blindly believe all the facts they report? It seems you pick and choose when to find a source credible or not. Besides, I've read at least 20 hate crime hoaxes. I've been to prison and know what real white supremacist shit looks like. And most the media reports look fake af. There becomes a point when you have to question the incidents being reported. Especially, when there's an obvious inclination for people to do the crimes themselves... They can do what ever they want and blame it on the evil white man. I grew up in violent neighborhoods and have been jumped a few times for being white, the reverse almost never happens nowadays. Also, I can go in some of the worst Hispanic and Black neighborhoods cuz I speak from an Og's perspective. Black neighborhoods are "generally" more dangerous. But that's not the arguement, which you avoid. The argument is that us discussing black neighborhoods being violent means one argument is seen as morally wrong even though it's factually right. And the other, morally right while it's factually wrong. Because leftist use pc to demonize, alienate and stifle debate and points of view that differ from their own.