The Case Against Human Rights

[Space Cowboy]

Something-something genocide something-something I'm not bringing Koori into this.

 

[Tegan]

I'm not jumping on the wrong person at all. Windsong stated his or her opinion. As we're all entitled to do. (Except for paedophiles or rapists, line all them up and shoot em)

Tegan's initial response however was a personal attack against Windsong because she (or he, who am I to judge) didn't like his (or her) opinion.

Which is understandable, its a controversial opinion that's about as politically correct as dressing up on a KKK outfit and joining a Westboro Baptist Church protest. (At least you'd fit in that way..)

So, it's not what I said, but how I said it? Is that how you feel?

Me stating my opinion that someone else's opinion was misinformed and hateful was a "Mean thing to do"?

Meaner than....Condemning an untold number of cultures to death because they weren't exploiting their natural resources in a way that I personally deemed unworthy?

 

[Asmodeus]

*grinds up handfuls of crazy pills and starts cutting them into lines*

 

[Brovo]

Yo Kad, as an old friend? Let it go. I interpreted Windsong's comment as bitterly humorous. Tegan is confronting if it's not such a statement, but not in any particularly unreasonable manner. If I were you, I'd at least agree to disagree, or take my chips and walk away from the table.

 

[Tegan]

But I haven't even asked them why it seems to be OK to punish rapists and pedos indiscrimately (just going off their example), but mass murders need special treatment. D:




Aaaaaand point made.



Goodnight kids. *Leaves General Forever*

 

[Windsong]

Talk about a blow out.

Damn.

I'm sad I missed all that in favor of freezing raiders alive to harvest their organs in RimWorld...

It was bitter humor anyway.

Sad to see people got offended by stuff on the Internet. :(

And since people seem so keen to condemn, lemme explain: if the prevalent cultures had simply annihilated or integrated successfully other lesser developed cultures into their fold. Surely the world would be further along than it currently is? Rather than these impoverished areas leeching from the dominant ones yet complaining they put them in that position?

Might makes right. The winner writes history. May as well make it bright.

 

[unanun]

Seems like a terminal case of monkey sphere - if one person is insulted it's terrible, but if it's an entire culture ...

And since people seem so keen to condemn, lemme explain: if the prevalent cultures had simply annihilated or integrated successfully other lesser developed cultures into their fold. Surely the world would be further along than it currently is? Rather than these impoverished areas leeching from the dominant ones yet complaining they put them in that position?

Might makes right. The winner writes history. May as well make it bright.

Except:

- I'd rather be a primitive hunter gatherer than have any interaction with your civilization in that case, just like those dudes on the isolated island that shoot arrows at the helicopters.

- The impoverished ones aren't leeching - far from it. Go read 'the economic hitman.' They are being loaned money by the IMF at ridiculous rates for projects they don't need so they can then contract first world companies to build it for them because their leaders were bribed. And other croney things.

- What is a lesser developed culture? Are you simply suggesting that warmongerers are superior?

 

[Kadaeux]

So, it's not what I said, but how I said it? Is that how you feel?

Me stating my opinion that someone else's opinion was misinformed and hateful was a "Mean thing to do"?

Meaner than....Condemning an untold number of cultures to death because they weren't exploiting their natural resources in a way that I personally deemed unworthy?

Not mean. Pointless. And not "how you said it"

Windsongs comment was not a personal attack directed at someone. (Whether politically correct or not.)

Yours was.



And so I suggested you NOT do that in order to have a civilised discussion.

You've obviously elected otherwise.

 

[Brovo]

Seems like a terminal case of monkey sphere - if one person is insulted it's terrible, but if it's an entire culture ...

"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." -Voltaire.

 

[Asmodeus]

So Windsong's advocacy of genocide is NOT pointless?

And it's more CIVILIZED than calling someone an asshole on the internet?



You are strange.

 

[Kadaeux]

So Windsong's advocacy of genocide is NOT pointless?

And it's more CIVILIZED than calling someone an asshole on the internet?



You are strange.

No, its his opinion and NOT a personal attack.

Nothing strange about it.

 

[Asmodeus]

See my last comment.


Better yet, see Brovo's second-from-last comment.

 

[Tegan]

Talk about a blow out.

Damn.

I'm sad I missed all that in favor of freezing raiders alive to harvest their organs in RimWorld...

It was bitter humor anyway.

Sad to see people got offended by stuff on the Internet. :(

And since people seem so keen to condemn, lemme explain: if the prevalent cultures had simply annihilated or integrated successfully other lesser developed cultures into their fold. Surely the world would be further along than it currently is? Rather than these impoverished areas leeching from the dominant ones yet complaining they put them in that position?

Might makes right. The winner writes history. May as well make it bright.

I fail to see the humor in such casual disregard for human life.

And yes, if those countries are 'whining because we put them in that position,' then I think that, yes, that does allow them some bitching rights, regardless of how uncomfortable it might make us folks at home feel.

I'm not asking you to stop freezing people alive in RimWorld. I'm not even asking you to change your mind.

Just consider....An option where we don't wipe out other cultures because we don't understand them and that makes us uncomfortable. We've done quite enough of that in the past and it doesn't work.

 

[Kadaeux]

See my last comment.


Better yet, see Brovo's second-from-last comment.

Yes, please do.

The problem is you're assuming a false equivalency.

Considering it justified to attack a person based on their opinion. That's not how a civilised discussion works.

A civilised discussion works not by attacking the person (which is an ad hominem) but to 'attack' the argument.

 

[Tegan]

Could you stop trying to derail this topic with your personal grievances @Kadaeux ? You've made them clear and I'm trying to debate with Windsong.

 

[Windsong]

Talk about a blow out.

Damn.
Well, genocide or forced integration.

-That's saying progress is bad. Which it rarely is?
-That's an issue that is just people making a buck off others misery.
-The cultures that murder thousands for a difference in an old book are another issue.

Looking at you, Africa.

And it's not about not understanding other cultures. It's about either forcing them to progress or, well, get out of the way there's things we need under your feet that you have no idea what to do with.

Somehow I butchered my own post into a quote.

Stupid phone and lagging on Iwaku.

 

[Brovo]

Ayee... Kay', I guess I can give this a try.

@Kadaeux Mate, eh, there's a certain... Scope to this, that I think you're missing as to why everybody above is kinda awestruck by your response. What Windsong advocated for, jokingly or not, was more efficient cultural genocide. Now, most human beings have a capacity for empathy, a capacity to care about their neighbours, to show love, mercy, to want to embolden themselves, and so on. So when Windsong stated...

I consider myself fairly well voiced in things.

Explain?

In a seemingly completely sincere tone. (Though tone is notoriously difficult to read through text because it's nonvocal communication and thus intent can be lost if it's not literal.) So Tegan responded by asking Windsong if he was joking or not, because if it isn't a joke, it's a pretty egregious, inhuman world view. Especially for western standards that typically try to promote tolerance and understanding and learning things. I mean, I'm not going to go to the extent of proclaiming right and wrong, but Tegan's response was, to be frank... Just fine. It was more a double take and a "what the fuck?" Than it was a "fuck you and the horse you rode in on."

Either way, you're attempting to make an argument that Tegan's argument is insufficient whilst avoiding the actual core of what Tegan's argument was. Which is kind of ironic and leads to a circular argument between proponent and opponent. Like we're in now.

 

[Asmodeus]

No no, I'm pretty sure this debate would have ACTUALLY gotten somewhere if we had called you and Windsong fucking idiots and moved on.

You know, we might have arrived at some REAL content, instead of dabbling in semantics and pussy-footing around everyone's desire to respect whatever poisonous retarded back-asswards opinion is vomited onto the page.




See Brovo's last comment.



Ridicule is the optimal instrument of progress.

You douche.

 

[Kadaeux]

Ayee... Kay', I guess I can give this a try.

@Kadaeux Mate, eh, there's a certain... Scope to this, that I think you're missing as to why everybody above is kinda awestruck by your response. What Windsong advocated for, jokingly or not, was more efficient cultural genocide. Now, most human beings have a capacity for empathy, a capacity to care about their neighbours, to show love, mercy, to want to embolden themselves, and so on. So when Windsong stated...

In a seemingly completely sincere tone. (Though tone is notoriously difficult to read through text because it's nonvocal communication and thus intent can be lost if it's not literal.) So Tegan responded by asking Windsong if he was joking or not, because if it isn't a joke, it's a pretty egregious, inhuman world view. Especially for western standards that typically try to promote tolerance and understanding and learning things. I mean, I'm not going to go to the extent of proclaiming right and wrong, but Tegan's response was, to be frank... Just fine. It was more a double take and a "what the fuck?" Than it was a "fuck you and the horse you rode in on."

Either way, you're attempting to make an argument that Tegan's argument is insufficient whilst avoiding the actual core of what Tegan's argument was. Which is kind of ironic and leads to a circular argument between proponent and opponent. Like we're in now.

Not at all.

No matter how polarised, an Ad Hominem attack is a no-no in a civilised debate.

I've missed nothing. Dishonest debating practices are dishonest debating practices no matter what the other side is advocating.

 

[Tegan]

"-The cultures that murder thousands for a difference in an old book are another issue. "

Our culture has murdered women just because they wanted access to medical procedures, contraception, basic human rights and abortion.Their argument (I am using that term loosely) justifies this with a child's right live. Then that same country denies refugee status to hundreds of Honduran children risking their lives to escape a war that we caused. And all of this within the last two years.

"And it's not about not understanding other cultures. It's about either forcing them to progress or, well, get out of the way there's things we need under your feet that you have no idea what to do with."

Yup, that reasoning worked just great with Native Americans.


Yes, we have so much to teach others about progress.