Which people-groups are currently allowed to be hated?

Post Reply New Topic

well, the constant misuse of terms render them as meaningless, as people question them, that is true, I'm not so sure about the "boy who cried wolf" analogy though, as the boy was intentionally lying, while this is a different matter, of perspective and idealism.

I'm not certain which of those terms have been "abused" (which that term may fall into the same problem) in the PPR forum at least. The issue with socialist, communist and terrorist seems too far out to even consider them to make sense. At least in the PPR forum, racism seems to have been more accurately identified, as there is no much objection of that, perhaps just a minority who believe in racial superiority.

The issue is also about definition, and people in an argument may disagree or dislike the use of the labels, but the terms are dependent on definitions and interpretation of definitions. I mean, homophobia for example, is defined as "discrimination based on sexual orientation" rather than just violent crimes or bullying, so following that, strictly speaking, anyone who rejects a person for being gay would be homophobe, the issue lies wether conservative churchs are homophobes following that defintion, of course, they would dislike the term on them, so they would need to redefine it for their sake.

What really matters about hate is how well you can justify it and whether or not you decide to act on it.

really classy to dis him after he's gone. /sarcasm

you're seeing in real time what has driven people out of PPR, or even right off WP: rampant racism and hate speech gone unchecked. i believe that this will change with time, but i am resting easy as a white person. when people are being racist on here, it is not directed at ME. one step removed, and i can't imagine how terrible it would feel to be black or muslim in here, with people making derogatory remarks and getting away with it. frankly, it's sick.

To be fair, BigK really shouldn't have become so attached to the nonsense posted by the WP Far-Right. The proper way to deal with the nonsense that's regularly spewed isn't to get mad at it or even to call for censorship, it's to become cynically detached and tear them apart where it hurts - at the facets of their ideas that are absurd and stupid.

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 17 Oct 2010, 1:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

he tried. he spoke up more than anyone against all the nonsense. but he was a member of a hated group, and that is a hard pill to swallow - to know that you are hated/disrespected/derided for something so ridiculous and unchangeable as your skin colour. he was one of the few people of a minority who was willing to even enter this forum. one brave muslim poster recently left in disappointment as well...

i disagree that censorship is the wrong way to deal with it. not total silencing, but without the support of moderation this part of the forum is mostly intolerable to the people who are targets. they would like to be able to come here to discuss PPR topics like anyone else, but it is exhausting, and enraging, and dispiriting to have to defend yourself for something like your skin colour.

Everyone is open to discrimination by me.

I think there are a few others, but most don't enter the shouting arena know as PPR. There's a disgusting amount of ignorance on PPR from outright racists, closet racists, and oblivious "libertarian" commentators, I will admit. Internet forums tend to be magnets for filth.



To be fair, the "Brave Muslim" was pretty self-righteous in starting a thread attacking a religion (Christianity) and expecting to be free from criticism. I critiqued his theme with a pork comment and I viewed it as justified as Islam is a religious group, which is sort of ideological, and I've attacked other religions (and sustained attacks from the faithful) in the past. The "Brave Muslim" also wasn't that racially enlightened as he made REALLY offensive remarks on Hispanic immigrants "taking jobs".



I think the may method should be HIT BACK - but do so in a detached way in which you show little anger or partiality to the posters in question. I've learned that the Con Artists pretty much whine like infants when you use their dirty tricks against them and - if enough people do it - they may get the message that what they are doing is reprehensible.

(he wasn't the only muslim who left. but about this one - i didn't realize he was posting anything offensive in here as well. that would be unacceptable for sure.)

the problem is that the perspectives of the racists involve hate, and we are not at the other extreme. most of us are moderate, or accepting of others. we are largely peace-loving and don't enjoy hurting and offending otehrs. so for most of us, that does not work.

the most important thing to me though, is that WP's own rules prohibit hate speech, therefore it should not be tolerated. if i was in a forum where it was not prohibited, i would suck it up or move on. but that is not the case.

I think it would just be better for the mods to lift the ban on personal insults when it came to hate speakers so one could hit harder, myself. Though I'll admit the probably is a little deeper and I am a bit conflicted as to whether batting racists over the head with reality will solve the problem as - due to economic collapse - America's on the verge of social disintegration.

What does it matter who leaves the site anyway? if BigK is no longer here, then good for him, for whatever reason it wouldn't matter, at least he could be doing more productive things now than wasting time and energy on a freaking internet forum, yep, I admit I waste time here, but I'm not complaining about that.

I'll admit that I waste a disgusting amount of time on Internet Forums and at PPR there's only a couple of people I can really have good conversations or rational debates with.

You forgot to mention fat people.

There is no secular group listed which is most likely the easiest target of any political campaign considering that they don't want most things illegal that are currently illegal. No specific religious group to protect them....just people who live on those fringes who live best left alone but rarely are.

Yeah, atheists are the one group that most Americans will ADMIT OPENLY to being prejudiced against. However, it's a pretty invisible (intellectual) characteristic so - unless you're vocal - it's easy to hide in American society.

http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/ ... _2816.html

Speaking of Con-Artists™, have you two rehearsed this much or is this purely ad-lib?

For people just entering this thread, this is not about "which people groups should be hated" but rather "which people groups are socially accepted as targets of arbitrary impersonal hate". In the past, 50 years ago, racism against people on the basis of having a skin color that wasn't white was then socially acceptable, and that was as wrong back then as it would be now. Now however it is socially acceptable to hate people on the basis of them being white. Similarly, any opposition to homosexually or the abduction of symbols by the (rainbow, purple, marriage) leads to accusations of "homophobia", the fear or hatred of homosexuals, regardless of whether people in opposition to homosexuality as a practice have any fear or hatred of proponents of homosexuality. "Racist"© is a label which is socially acceptable to only be applied to an Evil-Whiteman™. "Homophobe"© is just about as equally hollow as the appellation of "Racist"©, and likewise anyone given a cliched appellation of this nature is socially permitted to receive unmitigated hatred without fear of reprimand or repercussions of any kind since "They deserve it"™.