The current state of the political climate.

[Com Fox]

This is what occured recently during a speech at Florida by Richard Spencer: https://www.yahoo.com/news/three-charged-shooting-white-nationalists-florida-speech-191822761.html

Plot Twist: This time it wasn't the protesters that got unreasonably violent.

Now first, it should be addressed that thankfully no one is reported to be injured and that everyone is safe.

However the elephant in the room is this isn't just an uncommon occurrence. Seems recently people have been taking politics to the extreme and getting massively violent to other peoples thoughts and ideas, and this is evident that this isn't just the "political left" responsible as some like Milo claim. We've even had people assumed to have a political stance and tortured because of it with the 2017 torture incident.

Over here in Australia, the SSM Postal Vote hasn't exactly done many favours in terms of our political climate: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/ga...t/news-story/e5724dd62470cb83291a55443ff9db1f

Not sure about most Europe and Asia countries but Britain has had several ties between them since Brexit was decided.

There are many contributions that can be assumed from media bias, identity politics baiting to rebellious acts going too far but regardless one thing that I can't stand is people getting discriminated against and especially assaulted because of an opinion they have.

 

[Dotini]

Perhaps if the people have nothing better to do than bicker about their freedoms, rights and privileges, then things are actually going better than usual?

War, economic collapse, plagues, famine and other serious maladies of civilization seem to have sharply receded in their threat in the popular consciousness.

 

[Com Fox]

I don't think so, at least back then your political stance didn't associate you with everything to have your life assumed and to be assaulted because of said political stance.

I mean yes, the issues of famine, war and economic completely outweigh the arguments of today but it seems the arguments of today are doing to most damage to people.

 

[Dotini]

I don't think so, at least back then your political stance didn't associate you with everything to have your life assumed and to be assaulted because of said political stance.

I mean yes, the issues of famine, war and economic completely outweigh the arguments of today but it seems the arguments of today are doing to most damage to people.

Perhaps what doesn't kill us will make us stronger?

 

[daan]

War, economic collapse, plagues, famine

Has economic collapse been promoted to a full rider now?

 

[UKMikey]

Perhaps what doesn't kill us will make us stronger?

Counter-counter protesters taking potshots at people certainly seem to intend to kill other people so I find your post pretty relevant.

 

[Dotini]

Has economic collapse been promoted to a full rider now?

On the contrary, economic collapse appears to have been ruled out. Global employment, globally enforced "peace", widespread prosperity, universally available and affordable technologies, and above all the magnificent global triumph of capitalism bring the promise of a better tomorrow for everyone on Earth.

 

[W3H5]

Perhaps if the people have nothing better to do than bicker about their freedoms, rights and privileges, then things are actually going better than usual?

This modern wave of political “chaos” seem only present in developed nations where people have too much freedom, if such a thing can be said.

Being able to voice their opinions and practice their beliefs openly in a democratic society without fear of backlash from the establishment has lead people to branch out into so many sub-sets of political leaning that everything is a mess.

These days even the Ministry of Truth (BBC) are so “progressive” they’re borderline left wing liberals when for most of its existence the Ministry has been impartial and almost opposite the current British government.

This is just my opinion here, but I believe that the governments of many developed nations are too soft, allow too many freedoms and are partly to blame for the state of things. Obviously politics is a reflection of culture so the impression would be that all the people of these nations are going soft in the head but it seems only a small minority are where governments are taking their inspiration from.

 

[Com Fox]

Being able to voice their opinions and practice their beliefs openly in a democratic society without fear of backlash from the establishment has lead people to branch out into so many sub-sets of political leaning that everything is a mess.

That I can't get myself to agree with. These violent acts have already caused people to have fear of voicing their opinions as well as massive social pressure of saying the wrong thing spiralled out of control. Not to mention the U.K has a bad habit of arresting people because of tweets posted.

Also got to remember in the lesser development countries, voicing the wrong opinion could even get you executed, and hold massive propaganda as well as fear tactics. So even though our climate is bad, I can say it is not the worse.

 

[Com Fox]

.

 

[UKMikey]

That I can't get myself to agree with. These violent acts have already caused people to have fear of voicing their opinions as well as massive social pressure of saying the wrong thing spiralled out of control. Not to mention the U.K has a bad habit of arresting people because of tweets posted.

Also got to remember in the lesser development countries, voicing the wrong opinion could even get you executed, and hold massive propaganda as well as fear tactics. So even though our climate is bad, I can say it is not the worse.

I have to agree and find it ironic that his post calling for less freedom of expression is itself so heavily opinionated and contentious.

 

[W3H5]

I have to agree and find it ironic that his post calling for less freedom of expression is itself so heavily opinionated and contentious.

It’s not calling for less freedom, I don’t know how you gathered that from it. I was nearly pointing out that countries experiencing these social issues are the ones with the most freedom.

Perhaps I worded it wrong, or you misinterpreted what I meant, but I wasn’t calling for less freedom.

 

[Com Fox]

It’s not calling for less freedom, I don’t know how you gathered that from it. I was nearly pointing out that countries experiencing these social issues are the ones with the most freedom.

Perhaps I worded it wrong, or you misinterpreted what I meant, but I wasn’t calling for less freedom.

This is just my opinion here, but I believe that the governments of many developed nations are too soft, allow too many freedoms and are partly to blame for the state of things.

I don't know what else you could've meant by this?

 

[W3H5]

I don't know what else you could've meant by this?

Just that some governments are soft*, in my opinion, compared to others. I’m not saying restricting freedoms is something I’d want having lived for many years in communist China where many freedoms we take for granted don’t exist.

* liberal in comparison

 

[Com Fox]

Ok, I think I might be getting yah. Are you saying perhaps the government should enforce the laws that protect our freedoms more than letting things slide when violent behaviour gets out. Or is it something completely different?

 

[TexRex]

Perhaps what doesn't kill us will make us stronger?

Sure, that's one possibility. Another is that it will leave us horribly maimed.

 

[TetsuKobura]

Throughout the 5+ years I've paid attention to politics, I've found conversations with people that have views in favor of less authoritarian governments tend to be not only a lot more reasonable, but also worth listening to.

Mindlessly shouting phrases like, "F white people!" or "You're a racist!" not only get you nowhere with your argument, but also strengthen the side you're arguing against.

Some of my favorite commentators/speakers I listen to are Dave Rubin, Joe Rogan, Philip DeFranco, and Ben Shapiro. They'll debate anyone in a civil way, but also make excellent arguments for their case.

 

[UKMikey]

I saw a video with Shapiro where he was basically trolling a transgender person [EDIT: Caitlyn Jenner] and calling her "him" all the time. That didn't sound like a very civil debate to me.

 

[Com Fox]

I saw a video with Shapiro where he was basically trolling a transgender person [EDIT: Caitlyn Jenner] and calling her "him" all the time. That didn't sound like a very civil debate to me.

The calling her "him" is mainly because Shapiro doesn't agree with solving gender dysphoria by accepting them and rather them receive professional treatment.

Mind if I have a link? Seems interesting.

 

[UKMikey]

The calling her "him" is mainly because Shapiro doesn't agree with solving gender dysphoria by accepting them and rather them receive professional treatment.

Mind if I have a link? Seems interesting.

I understand his position but disagree with the idea that it's in any way presented civilly or respectfully. (The MRA guy who pointed me towards Shapiro also told me that people had been jailed over the gender pronoun debate which I also find hard to believe.)

 

[Com Fox]

The only thing I saw that would be trolling using the "wrong gender" and it wasn't in the Milo sense where the intention was to rile up his haters, Shapiro does it because of his beliefs, you can like it or not or even disagree (like I do) but I can't call it uncivil or trolling.

What I did find uncivil was Shapiro unable to address his view the moment he used the wrong pronoun and went on about that and then he received a violent threat immediately after. Which actually makes me think the uncivilized is in the other side of what you're trying to show.

 

[Liquid]

Society, or at least the majority of the societies of the people who are most likely to be in the OCE forum as an example, has become exceptionally polarised in the last 20 years. It appears that you're either this over here or that over there, depending on the argument or to whom you're talking.

You either love people having guns or hate people having guns.
You either endorse FATPOU healthcare or strive for private healthcare.
You either are in favour of abortion for everyone or no abortions for anyone.
You either support foreign wars or detest a perceived imperialist doctrine.
You either love immigration or hate immigration.

The middle ground isn't there any more. And I don't mean the middle ground of sitting on the fence or playing both sides. Perhaps I'm using the wrong phrase but the middle ground of context, looking at both arguments, critically thinking about the supposed pros and cons of each side, all of that seems to have been eroded. If it hasn't been eroded, it has at least been heavily displaced by the polarised spectrum. The middle voice, a logical and considerate voice, has been drowned out; moderates and classical liberals get called fascists for not supporting hard-left causes and snowflake turncoats for not blindly and obediently supporting flags and the establishment.

Before the 1990s there was the general, all-encompassing capitalism vs communism polarising spectrum argument sure, but, and I may be wrong on this considering I was born in 1991, there's something really different about society now. If it ever wasn't actually a case of us vs them then, it really isn't now. There are so many other factors when addressing issues in society or the wider world. It isn't east vs west or this vs that. Or, it shouldn't be.

I've always felt that 24 hour micronews and social media has had an immeasurable influence on all of this. It has allowed society to hold a mirror up to itself and see what we are really like as a collective in a way which we simply could neither do nor imagine before; we've always been like this and now we're slowly starting to see it.

 

[UKMikey]

The only thing I saw that would be trolling using the "wrong gender" and it wasn't in the Milo sense where the intention was to rile up his haters, Shapiro does it because of his beliefs, you can like it or not or even disagree (like I do) but I can't call it uncivil or trolling.

What I did find uncivil was Shapiro unable to address his view the moment he used the wrong pronoun and went on about that and then he received a violent threat immediately after. Which actually makes me think the uncivilized is in the other side of what you're trying to show.

Jenner was out of order but she probably feels she was provoked to the point of losing her cool. I'm not trying to prove that people on her side are paragons of virtue but rather call into question the idea that people on the other side are acting any more civilised. But it's all probably a matter of opinion. If you deny someone the right to their own identity and instead demand they receive psychiatric help even though a psychologist is demonstrably supportive of their side, is that truly civilised? I think it's open to debate but believe that it takes two people to have a disagreement.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The MRA guy who pointed me towards Shapiro also told me that people had been jailed over the gender pronoun debate which I also find hard to believe.

Except for apocryphally-based click-bait interpretations no source has been produced here for that having happened or for it being provided for in law. There have been a few retracted attempts, if you'll pardon the mixed imagery.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Jenner was out of order but she probably feels she was provoked to the point of losing her cool. I'm not trying to prove that people on her side are paragons of virtue but rather call into question the idea that people on the other side are acting any more civilised. But it's all probably a matter of opinion. If you deny someone the right to their own identity and instead demand they receive psychiatric help even though a psychologist is demonstrably supportive of their side, is that truly civilised? I think it's open to debate but believe that it takes two people to have a disagreement.

Errrr that's not Jenner in that video. Provoked into losing your cool is a non-starter for me. Words expressed on a PG rated television talk show shouldn't have the power to cause grown ass adults to threaten violence. You have a problem if that happens.

 

[UKMikey]

Errrr that's not Jenner in that video. Provoked into losing your cool is a non-starter for me. Words expressed on a PG rated television talk show shouldn't have the power to cause grown ass adults to threaten violence. You have a problem if that happens.

If that's the case, then I'm not sure where they should go from there. "Some minor US celeb whom I can't tell from another celeb on a talk show somewhere lost their cool" doesn't sound to me like a sufficient reason to shut the debate down, pack up and go home, and award the "win" to the "provocateur". Unless some common ground can be found somewhere, even if that entails swapping the debaters for more reasonable ones, then as far as I can see the current state of the political climate will continue.

 

[RC45]

Wait, so some cross dressing blonde that wishes they where a female gets a free pass at a direct threat of physical violence but the polite male that indicated a desire to use the biological and grammatically correct pronoun when discussing another biological male is viewed as the aggressor?

 

[Johnnypenso]

If that's the case, then I'm not sure where they should go from there. "Some minor US celeb whom I can't tell from another celeb on a talk show somewhere lost their cool" doesn't sound to me like a sufficient reason to shut the debate down, pack up and go home, and award the "win" to the "provocateur". Unless some common ground can be found somewhere, even if that entails swapping the debaters for more reasonable ones, then as far as I can see the current state of the political climate will continue.

Personally I think Ben Shapiro is about as reasonable as you get when it comes to debating. Not necessarily his ideas but his approach and his use of logic, science, statistics etc. That aside, I think the idea of common ground is fast becoming passe'. Common ground means each side gives a little and meets in the middle but because the political and social climate is so polarized I don't think either constituency can be happy with the middle ground any more. Some issues don't have much of middle ground either. You can either marry as a same sex couple or you can't, I'm not sure where you'd find middle ground there. You can either use the bathroom of the sex you identify with or you can't. You can either buy a gun or you can't. IMO some of these issues will never be put to rest in the U.S., unless and until there is an overwhelming cultural shift away from so-called conservative values and towards progressivism. The way the two party system works, each side plays to it's base in order to get elected voters are pretty much evenly distributed on each side of the spectrum.

 

[UKMikey]

Wait, so some cross dressing blonde that wishes they where a female gets a free pass at a direct threat of physical violence but the polite male that indicated a desire to use the biological and grammatically correct pronoun when discussing another biological male is viewed as the aggressor?

No one here is giving her a free pass or seeing the other guy as the aggressor but I think there's no desire on either side for conciliation even though I'm not sure whether it's an either/or situation. Your mileage may vary but I guess the question of whether we should concentrate purely on physical biology and ignore the psychological aspect is a matter for the transgender thread which has input from people who are actually in that situation.

 

[RC45]

No one here is giving her a free pass or seeing the other guy as the aggressor but I think there's no desire on either side for conciliation even though I'm not sure whether it's an either/or situation. Your mileage may vary but I guess the question of whether we should concentrate purely on physical biology and ignore the psychological aspect is a matter for the transgender thread which has input from people who are actually in that situation.

I am not even discussing the biology, I am pointing out that getting bent out of shape over a pronoun is stupid first world idiocy.