So you see my point now?

Sushi, I think we still disagree on the reasons for the rise of the alt right internationally and the extent to which extreme pc is a threat to freedom.

How do you know? I’ve only talked about two points: the effect of the internet and extremists pushing PC speech.

I certainly don’t regard these as the only factors worth considering and that there is any one underlying factor that is apparent in every nation (other than the internet playing an obvious role in amplifying certain views and ideas here and there).

You asked about why people push against PC. I told you why. You apparently “disagree” with the reasons people have been giving publicly for the past couple of decades - outside of academia as presented by the views of prominent comedians in the UK and journalists and writers the world over no doubt.

Very generally speaking it makes perfect sense that as the world opens up and we become more linked as a group of humans on a planet that some people struggle with, and defend, certain senses of personal identity. The older generations will inevitably bemoan the changes happening to some degree and the younger generations will inevitably push for the need to shake things up and dust then off to some degree.

I actually think all the perceived political turmoil we’re witnessing is a good thing. I imagine a more centrist attitude will arise out of this and then the whole bloody pattern of human indecision and stupidity will lead back into a more polarised view after that. I’m not greatly worried about the current state of the political world and understand that sadly some countries are going to fall into a more extreme political state for a while. Hopefully those that don’t have enough gumption to take note of their neighbours mistakes and plough on with making the political world part of everyone lives rather than waiting for huge global shifts to rouse the general populace into action.

The current climate of hostility and conflict taking place is a sign of democracy in action and open debate. If we lived in a world where everyone as fine with everything, or tat is what was being reported, I’d assume I was living in a dystopian society.

Note too that the recent EU elections show pretty much a 50-50 split between left wing and right wing positions. The extreme ends look quite balanced too.

A rise in the perceived rise of the left or right maybe just that? Maybe it is simply a false perception of what has been pretty much the same since the end of WWII?

Personally I’m more fussed about what is going on in Brasil. That does worry more than a little, but I’m not hysterical about it just yet :) It does appear open efforts are being made to block the him so that’s something to celebrate - when it goes silent I’ll worry more!

I’ve only talked about two points: the effect of the internet and extremists pushing PC speech.

I certainly don’t regard these as the only factors worth considering and that there is any one underlying factor that is apparent in every nation — I like sushi

The rise of the far right is due to the extreme left enabling them. — I like sushi

There's where we disagree. The rise of the right is not precipitated by political correctness but by scapegoating. Resentment of PC - and PC has been around for decades - begins with fear and anger at being at the losing end of a widening income gap and ends with blaming minorities instead of the mafia plutocrats who are actively amplifying this on social media. You are looking at the effects, not the causes. Beware of Bannon and others of his ilk. It's a sad world when people are duped into thinking of social justice as a pejorative.

Look, you’re guilty of the kind of thing I’m talking about. You want to make me the enemy and so read what I write as saying something I’ve not actually said. I am not saying you’re doing this on purpose, it is likely because you’re genuinely concerned about the political landscape and that is great! We need to be vigilant.

I didn’t actually say what you’ve inferred above. I said the extreme left enables the extreme right and that PC speech is a vehicle (and I’ve said already I don’t think PC is necessarily bad in and if itself). The issue is it’s creeping into matters of law and order and has been doing for a while. Now such things are being more openly voiced it seems the both left and right extremes are popping up more readily with something to latch onto - this is a good sign for me because it should be aired not driven underground.

Of course trolls shouldn’t be given too much time of day. That is another term thrown around too flippantly to discredit and undermine a genuine concern (be it valid or not!)

The media voice now is that of the people. Anyone can get involved and anyone has been getting involved. This has inevitably led to people speaking openly and frankly, and often misguidedly, about many sensitive topics. All VERY good I believe, but it’s a bumpy road and I really believe the next few generations coming through will understand the dynamics of online communication better having been exposed to misinterpretation and slander in their day-to-day life and having grown up understanding the power of words and hopefully this will lead to a more nuanced understanding of each other.

I don’t see the above happening if PC starts to dictate more and more how law and order is structured. It is not like people are saying we should all go around being purposely offensive and vile to each other, it’s just that they don’t wish to pander to people who feel upset or outraged by something someone says to the point where they believe they have the right to demand such people be gagged and/or live under the fear of legal prosecution - there are already laws in place for such things.

Just to remind you the police put up posters to report offensive speech used on social media in the UK. Of course they were quickly mocked and the posters didn’t stay up for long, BUT the point is they put them up in the first place.

I don’t need to beware of Bannon? I can see clearly enough what he’s been doing and what he has continued to do. I’ve listened closely to what he’s said in long talks. He isn’t really hiding much about his intentions and how he operates. I’m more concerned with the one’s quietly going about their business out of the limelight.

The light at the end of the tunnel makes things look brighter when Joe Cox’s husband comes out saying attacking politicians in any way is wring after the infamous milkshake incidents. Let the fools speak, and let the fools be questioned - both side are worth listening to, but certainly not at the expense of ignoring the moderate centrists (which is sadly something tat tends to happen too much because they just aren’t all that ‘appealing’ being moderate).

I think Stephen Fry put it well enough in the so-called “debate on Political Correctness” when he referred to the gaping chasm between most of us find ourselves in drowned out by the screaming few at each pole.

Look, you’re guilty of the kind of thing I’m talking about. You want to make me the enemy and so read what I write as saying something I’ve not actually said. — I like sushi

You did say that extreme PC is what gives rise to the right wing as I quoted you in my last reply. You might have changed your mind, or your initial statement might not have been clear. Of course I don't want to make you "the enemy". I have openly expressed my concern about extreme PC all along (although my concern is not nearly so great as yours seems to be). So tell me this - do you agree with the following, which remains my position:

• What gives rise to the alt right it is increasing inequality combined with a propensity of those who have lost economic security and social status for scapegoating.

• Pundits' concerns with extreme PC inadvertently feed the alt right beast.

• Since the alt right is far more basic threat to democracy than extreme political correctness, pundits should spend more time warning people of the dangers of the alt right than they do the extremes of political correctness and inadvertently feeding the beast.

What gives rise to the alt right it is increasing inequality combined with a propensity of those who have lost economic security and social status for scapegoating. — Izat So

It's not so much economic inequality as it is fear of economic inequality. We're no longer in recession, but the market failures of the last decade (eg: the 2008 eal-estate bubble) have caused many to doubt the path we're on (and both sides tend to disagree about what path we're actually on, let alone should be on).

"Loss of social status" ~ now you're on to something! The alt-right fears a world where "whites have their rights voted away by a vengeful new majority", and as "evidence" they magnify whichever leftist happens to be the radical du jour. The alt-right's focus on identity is actually a reactionary move (mirroring the identity focus of the extreme left).

Pundits' concerns with extreme PC inadvertently feed the alt right beast — Izat So

Indeed, reacting to extreme PCness is from whence they derive their initial emotional reassurance.

Since the alt right is far more basic threat to democracy than extreme political correctness, pundits should spend more time warning people of the dangers of the alt right than they do the extremes of political correctness and inadvertently feeding the beast. — Izat So

But if extreme political correctness feeds the beast, then it's also a threat to democracy. If the alt-right would not exist without extreme political correctness to react to and provide their emotional justification, would we be better off without extreme political correctness? Maybe marginalizing the excesses of the left is actually the most effective way of marginalizing the alt-right's ability to recruit?

It's not so much economic inequality as it is fear of economic inequality. We're no longer in recession, but the market failures of the last decade (eg: the 2008 eal-estate bubble) have caused many to doubt the path we're on (and both sides tend to disagree about what path we're actually on, let alone should be on). — VagabondSpectre

if extreme political correctness feeds the beast... — VagabondSpectre

I didn't say it was extreme political correctness that feeds the beast, it's the pundits' endlessly complaining how PC is a threat to freedom that inadvertently feeds it.

Pundits' concerns with extreme PC inadvertently feed the alt right beast. — Izat So

So it's not the least surprising that Jordan Peterson has a large unsavoury following of alt right supporters.

This is not photoshopped. He did an interview with CBC's Wendy Mesley explaining it.

This was taken in New Zealand:

If the alt-right would not exist without extreme political correctness to react to and provide their emotional justification, would we be better off without extreme political correctness? — VagabondSpectre

If you've been listening, they would indeed exist without extreme PC, just as they existed in Germany after WWI because they felt they were losing ground to people who were "supposed to be minorities". If you expect privilege (especially if you don't have it), equality looks like oppression. All I'm saying about PC is that pundits are inadvertently fuelling the fire of the alt right. They're missing the point in a big way. Also look at the link I posted about Americans shooting themselves in the foot to maintain racial hierarchy.

For the umpteenth time, what creates the resentment that fuels the alt right in the first place is the siphon-up economics of the rent-seeking economy - the same ponzi scheme of the type that gave rise to the financial meltdown of 2008 and which Trump is keen to continue to champion and enable.

Exactly. I said EXTREME not merely PC. You asked why in the OP and I said why ... that is because the extreme left push the narrative into law and order.

Islamaphobia is a terrible term. Secularism is good. You may be religious and believe it is okay for law and order to be dictated by the writings of some people centuries ago though?

Pepe represents what exactly? Do you have any idea what you’re suggesting? Pepe is a joke meme meant to poke fun at people on the left. It is spewed across the internet all the time and NOT racist.

Anyway, we can disagree and it appears you don’t want to budge in the slightest or understand that I have answered your OP and given reasons why there is a backlash (VERY clear reasons with clear evidence). Have you seen the ‘debate’ with Fry and Peterson on PC?

Nothing more to say, sorry.

I said EXTREME not merely PC — I like sushi

Yeah, so did I. What of it? AND I don't think it's fundamentally the PC that are pushing the right, regardless of whether they "push the narrative into law and order".

Pepe is a joke meme meant to poke fun at people on the left. It is spewed across the internet all the time and NOT racist. — I like sushi

No, it is not that innocuous, and in fact JP acknowledges its use in his interview with Wendy Mesley (linked in a previous post).

it appears you don’t want to budge in the slightest or understand that I have answered your OP — I like sushi

You're not budging at all. Actually you have not responded to this:

What gives rise to the alt right it is increasing inequality combined with a propensity of those who have lost economic security and social status for scapegoating. — Izat So

You have not really shown how growign income disparity combined with a propensity for scapegoating is not a more fundamental cause and extreme PC just the amplifier.

I did say I wasn’t going to say anything, but you’ve forced my hand by insinuating I’ve made some claim I haven’t:

You have not really shown how growign income disparity combined with a propensity for scapegoating is not a more fundamental cause and extreme PC just the amplifier.

I have no intention of doing so because I’ve never made the claim that I believe the opposite. Income disparity has always led to identity politics on the the right and on the left - I certainly wouldn’t, and haven’t, discounted it.

I’ve answered the OP so let someone else try.

So in summary:

What gives rise to the alt right it is increasing inequality combined with a propensity of those who have lost economic security and social status for scapegoating. — Izat So

The rise of the far right is due to the extreme left [extreme PC, presumably] enabling them. — I like sushi

Income disparity has always led to identity politics on the the right and on the left. — I like sushi

Presumably on the right it would mean scapegoating.

Pundits' concerns with extreme PC inadvertently feed the alt right beast. — Izat So

What a heavy PC tilt does is give voice to the extreme ends of the societal discontent. — I like sushi

You might think that pundits are merely trying to temper a "heavy PC tilt" - perhaps Fry is the most reasonable exemplar - but given the fact other PC critics are latched onto by the right (vis Peterson's vanity shots), they are not so much tempering the PC as they are emboldening the right.

Since the alt right is far more basic threat to democracy than extreme political correctness, pundits should spend more time warning people of the dangers of the alt right than they do the extremes of political correctness and inadvertently feeding the beast. — Izat So

The money is backing the right and we have more to fear from the right than extreme PC, as so much right wing violence and the relative absence of PC violence has attested in recent decades. Extreme PC just manages to shoot itself in the foot.

So that outlines our points of disagreement.

So it's not the least surprising that Jordan Peterson has a large unsavoury following of alt right supporters.

This is not photoshopped. — Izat So

The below picture is not photoshopped. In the picture there is the now former (then acting) President of Finland Tarja Halonen (President of Finland 2000-2012) holding a flag with a very observable swastika.



But this shouldn't come as a surprise of a country with such devotion to the Swastika, just look at the flag of the President of Finland. Note the symbol in medal in the upper left corner.:



And if this isn't enough, here's the winner of the "Greatest Finn" competition alongside the second place winner. In the competition, Finns could vote for the greatest Finnish person ever and the competition was very popular. Everybody assumed correctly the winner, yet the 2nd runner up was a total surprise for the people who made the competition. Here's the "greatest Finn" on the left in front and the "2nd greatest Finn" on the right. In the middle is one famous Austrian born politician people might know from history, who has come to Finland all the way from Germany to celebrate the birthday of the (later elected) "greatest Finn", who in this picture is wearing the German Knights Cross and Iron Cross . And this photo isn't photoshopped, of course.



Pictures tell more than a thousand words. So make up your minds about Finns and how favourable they are to nazism or the alt-right from the pictures above... because the simple deduction from those pictures is in quite in line with your reasoning with JP and the "thing" with Political Correctness, Izat. Or basically how this issue is debated. :razz:

As usual (as we have had this discussion already), I would be agreeing somewhat or totally with "I like Sushi" and the differences between us would be minor.

"Political Correctness", "the left", "the Right", are all a bit difficult to discuss because the terms are too fluid. We put the fluid terms in our squirt guns and aim as well as we can.

It seems to me that there is no necessary link between "the left" and "the right" these days. — Bitter Crank

Oh your are just too old, Bitter Crank. You seem to get your notions and definitions as how they were used in the 20th Century when these things were far more, dare I say, solid.

This coming from a 'toxic centrist'.

the simple deduction from those pictures is in quite in line with your reasoning with JP — ssu

I didn't "deduce" - I read about the history of Pepe and listened to JP's interview with Wendy Mesley where he justifies his association with the image, knowing its association with the alt right. I know JP is not alt right, if that's what you're suggesting. But he is known to be attractive to some sects of the alt right.

So if we look up the history of the swastika vis a vis Finland we will not be "deducing" anything from the pictures but learning about how they happen to be there. Seems the Finns were concerned about the Soviets and allied with the Nazis insofar as they were fighting the Soviets, but were not forced to submit to nazi rule. It is still used as an air force icon. Meanwhile there is an active alt right presence in Finland that uses the German version of the Swastika, as in many places.

Disgruntled manhood with a zero sum mentality reacts badly in the face of up and coming minorities and the increasing presence of women in the public sphere when their fortunes are insecure and they are not making expected gains in economic status. Resentment is a large part of the disdain for PC as well as the rise of the alt right. Disappointed expectations also explains the rise in suicides, the opioid crisis, and plenty of other social ailments. As has been said many times, when you have an expectation of privilege (reasonable or not), equality looks like oppression. Hence all the trumped up hoopla about PC.

I know JP is not alt right, if that's what you're suggesting. But he is known to be attractive to some sects of the alt right. - As has been said many times, when you have an expectation of privilege (reasonable or not), equality looks like oppression. Hence all the trumped up hoopla about PC. — Izat So

And this opinion you have stated quite clearly: that basically those who criticize PC are basically enablers of the alt-right either purposefully or unintentionally, but they still do that. And that the extreme right is on the rise.

First of all I don't think that the extreme right is on the rise (just as the extreme left isn't either). What is on the rise is simply political tribalism, polarization in the political discourse and the portraying of the other side with obscene stereotypes that have nothing to do with reality in order to lure people into echo chambers supporting the 'cause' of one side or the another. Simply put it: nazism or neonazism hasn't any viability at all in US politics just like Communism. The idea is simply hilarious. Yet these astoundingly bizarre ideas are promoted as it's a great way to lure people in to support one side or the another. The reason for this is that two parties, a Centrist and a right-wing party, want to continue to dominate the political landscape in the US through this system of duopoly. Trump is no Hitler. Just as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez aren't going to turn the US into Venezuela. Yet the lurid narrative 'America on the edge of peril' is willingly accepted. And there is widespread incapability to see this because your side is right and the other side is wrong.

And the criticism towards PC?

According to a Pew research poll, the majority of Americans (59%) say “too many people are easily offended these days over the language that others use.” That doesn't mean that the majority of Americans are racists or either feel sympathy or unintentionally advance the agenda of the alt-right. No, using the Occam's razor could give an answer that the majority is simply tired of walking on eggshells, yet don't see it as Trojan Horse for cultural Marxism as the extreme right does.

From one insightful article in the Atlantic Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture:

25 percent of Americans are traditional or devoted conservatives, and their views are far outside the American mainstream. Some 8 percent of Americans are progressive activists, and their views are even less typical. By contrast, the two-thirds of Americans who don’t belong to either extreme constitute an “exhausted majority.” Their members “share a sense of fatigue with our polarized national conversation, a willingness to be flexible in their political viewpoints, and a lack of voice in the national conversation.”

First of all I don't think that the extreme right is on the rise — ssu

WP - Right Wing Violence is on the Rise

The Rise of Right Wing Extremism in the US

Economist: Right Wing Terrorism on the Rise in the West

Right Wing Violence rising in the US

New Yorker: It is time to confront right wing terrorism

CBC: Extremist groups and hate crimes growing in Canada

"In the past 10 years when you look at murders committed by domestic extremists in the United States of all types, right-wing extremists are responsible for about 74 percent of those murders," Pitcavage says.

Extreme PC is relatively rare, in my experience, and I can't understand why anyone would be offended with social justice, unless they are in some sense feeling threatened by the rising fortunes of women and minorities. I have no problem with a charter of rights. I don't think people should be fired from their jobs because they lapse into assholeness from time to time however. And the evidence shows the right is more dangerous than the extreme PC front. Has Antifa shot anyone yet?

WP - Right Wing Violence is on the Rise

The Rise of Right Wing Extremism in the US

Economist: Right Wing Terrorism on the Rise in the West

Right Wing Violence rising in the US

New Yorker: It is time to confront right wing terrorism

CBC: Extremist groups and hate crimes growing in Canada

"In the past 10 years when you look at murders committed by domestic extremists in the United States of all types, right-wing extremists are responsible for about 74 percent of those murders," Pitcavage says. — Izat So

B-b-b-b-ut I can't make tasteless jokes anymore and that's the most important thing!

And the evidence shows the right is more dangerous than the extreme PC front. — Izat So

Let's look at terrorism at a glance. Here's how our times compare for example to the 1970's:





Just as with crime stats, the truth is that terrorism isn't on the rise in the long run. And to simply state the obvious: neonazism has no chance in hell to get political traction in the US. Yes, there is far right terrorism, anti-semitism, just as there are school shootings etc. Terrorism morphs to the lone nut type as obviously all the extremist groups in the US are quite well infiltrated by the FBI and other security organizations.

But of course you can find articles about rising far right extremism...

B-b-b-b-ut I can't make tasteless jokes anymore and that's the most important thing! — StreetlightX

Indeed!

_______________


Now, some stats since Trump was elected:

"On Wednesday, the Anti-Defamation League released a report finding that attackers with ties to right-wing extremist movements killed at least 50 people in 2018. That was close to the total number of Americans killed by domestic extremists, meaning that the far right had an almost absolute monopoly on lethal terrorism in the United States last year. That monopoly would be total if, in one case, the perpetrator had not “switched from white supremacist to radical Islamist beliefs prior to committing the murder.”

"The number of fatalities is 35 percent higher than the previous year, and it marks the fourth-deadliest year for such attacks since 1970. In fact, according to the ADL, white supremacists are responsible for the majority of such attacks “almost every year.” The 2018 attacks include the one at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue by a man who blamed Jews for the migrant caravan, the mass shooting at a yoga studio by an “incel” obsessed with interracial dating, and the school massacre in Parkland, Florida, carried out by a student who wished that “all the Jews were dead.”
__________________________

"An analysis of the Global Terrorism Database by researchers at the University of Maryland published in 2017 shows a “sharp increase” in the share of attacks by right-wing extremists
the trend persisted in 2017, when most attacks in the US were committed by right-wing extremists

"Out of 65 incidents last year, 37 were tied to racist, anti-Muslim, homophobic, anti-Semitic, fascist, anti-government, or xenophobic motivations.

"That list includes an attack by neo-Nazi extremist James Fields against a crowd of counter-protestors in Charlottesville, which left one person dead. It also includes attacks against a gay bar in Puerto Rico, mosques in Washington, Texas, and Florida, and a vehicle decorated with Jewish iconography in New York.

"In the same period, seven attacks were linked to Islamic extremists, and 11 attacks were inspired by left-leaning ideologies.

"That right-wing activity is fueling a surge in terrorism in the US. Overall, the US had only six attacks a decade ago, but 65 in 2017. The number of fatalities is also increasing, in contrast to a global decrease in terror attacks."

the right is more dangerous than the extreme PC front — Izat So

I don't think that neo-nazis are going to take over the US but the shift to the right and the direction it has been taking since Trumpspeak (and apologetic punditry) has intentionally or unintentionally normalized a lot of mean spirited scapegoating.

terrorism isn't on the rise in the long run — ssu

No, it isn't - except in the US since Trump and the largest proportion by far is right wing - hopefully whoever succeeds him will reverse the trend. And it's not likely to be reversed by pundits who appeal largely to those with expectations of privilege with their talk about the threats of political correctness to civil society.

Pretty much everything Maw said. — Maw

In case you didn't copy, yes, agreed.

The rise of the far right is due to the extreme left enabling them. — I like sushi

So? Do you mea to say that the above cartoon is offensive but okay because it doesn’t include you? Are you bolstering my position on purpose or was it a slip up on your part?

I did actually write a block of text after that line explaining my point. If I was more careful I would’ve said the rise of any extreme right view is due to the extreme left as much as the rise in the extreme left is due to the extreme right - I did amend this later by explaining that I see the extreme right as having immediate mobilization whereas the extreme left gains movement and only gets its voice heard publicly some time after the initial problem has abated (I could be wrong, but that is my informed opinion; the left being naturally more passive in their philosophical disposition).

As for being arrested for calling a horse ‘gay’ and other sensible arguments against inhibiting speech:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h3UeUnRxE0E



The goes for yourself now. Nothing more to say (even if you choose to misquote or insult me) ... then again I remain hopeful that you may turn the other cheek and be willing to engage?

It could be interesting to actually turn this into a debate where those generally FOR PC argue against it and those generally AGAINST PC argue for it. I can put up a pretty solid fight FOR the question is can you put up a solid fight AGAINST?

I think it would be a useful exercise. I will start a thread on this if people here are willing to engage in it?

Ah yes, the mass persecution of equine homophobia. A perfectly reasonable account for the for the rise of the right.

Is that a ‘no thanks’ or a ‘you’re an idiot’?

Oh not at all, I too, consider overreactions to equine homophobia to be an existential threat to Western Civilisation. It is a Very Important Problem.

B-b-b-b-ut I can't make tasteless jokes anymore and that's the most important thing!
— StreetlightX

Indeed! — Izat So

So you start a thread on Political correctness...

terrorism isn't on the rise in the long run
— ssu

No, it isn't - except in the US since Trump and the largest proportion by far is right wing

Again, notice the chart here. What it tells that acts of terrorism were more frequent also in the US earlier than now:



The picture World wide is different. But I assume this thread, as usual, isn't about the World outside the US.

Again, notice the chart here. What it tells that acts of terrorism were more frequent also in the US earlier than now: — ssu

And declining until 2016 - but it's been rising since Trump - actually since 2015.

↪Maw So? Do you mean to say that the above cartoon is offensive but okay because it doesn’t include you? Are you bolstering my position on purpose or was it a slip up on your part? — I like sushi

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but I think Maw's cartoon was meant as a caricature of your view.

I too, consider overreactions to equine homophobia to be an existential threat to Western Civilisation — StreetlightX

And so should we all.

Does that mean you’re not interested in my proposed thread?

Yes, you were stating the obvious. My comment was apparently not so obvious? I was pointing out that it is a cartoon that could easily be construed by some (ie. Trump voters) as highly offensive. Meaning it is not a good idea to put laws on speech as who is the judge over what is or isn’t too offensive (this is clear enough in the speech given by Rowan Atkinson that StreetlightX preferred to mock than actually listen to apparently - I assume that because such a flippant remark seemed rather out of place given the actual points being made in that speech).

If you want to go for the debate idea let me know. Of not good luck and good bye.

B-b-b-b-ut I can't make tasteless jokes anymore and that's the most important thing!
— StreetlightX

Indeed! — Izat So

How the "can't" is effectively enforced is what matters there, and it affects a whole lot more people than murders committed by terrorists.