Madness

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

Sherlock Holmes

Madness

Post #1

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Should the West ostracize Russians on the basis that Ukraine is under attack by Russia?

For example: Alexander Malofeev

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: Madness

Post #2

Post by Purple Knight »

My opinion of ostracism is that it's fine if it happens naturally. No one has to interact with anyone they don't want to, and whatever ridiculously dumb reason they have is fine. The "get woke, go broke" movement is a good example. I'm extremely in favour of being race-conscious, I'm against anyone protesting race-conscious companies, but you know what? They have a point. Every time something is race-conscious, the message has to be central and at the expense of everything else, so people walked away. And they did it without organising a conspiracy. No one should be forced to buy a moral without a story if they're shopping for a story.

But when you're convincing others to ostracise, that's a mob. And ironically the disparate levels of power mean it won't work on anybody that deserves it. It will work on some hapless pianist who doesn't deserve it.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Madness

Post #3

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

There's more, its getting worse:
Facebook and Instagram will temporarily allow users in some countries to call for violence against Russians when speaking about the Ukraine invasion, reports Reuters.

Meta Platforms will allow Facebook and Instagram users in some countries to call for violence against Russians and Russian soldiers in the context of the Ukraine invasion, according to internal emails seen by Reuters on Thursday, in a temporary change to its hate speech policy.

The social media company is also temporarily allowing some posts that call for death to Russian President Vladimir Putin or Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko in countries including Russia, Ukraine and Poland, according to a series of internal emails to its content moderators.

These calls for death will be allowed unless they contain other targets or have two indicators of credibility, such as the location or method, one email said, in a recent change to the company’s rules on violence and incitement.
Facebook are reprehensible for acting this way, back to the dark ages we go, racism rules, how sad...

The spoiled rich brats that run Facebook have never known hardship, or suffering, or poverty, this is all a game to them.

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: Madness

Post #4

Post by Purple Knight »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu Mar 10, 2022 5:51 pmThe spoiled rich brats that run Facebook have never known hardship, or suffering, or poverty, this is all a game to them.
The problem is how much actual power these imbeciles have. They control much of the public space. If they say, "you can't say that," they have the power to enforce it.

This is my example for the future when I talk about who has power, not about what technically happened and what technical titles people hold. My concern is not nomenclature but fact. Whose will is being forced upon whom? Who holds the power... and not how.

In other words, if you go to the grocery store and pay them not to sell any food to Joe, and he starves, you've killed him and I don't give beans about how you did it. I don't believe there is a special knife, made a special way, so that when someone is killed with this particular knife, it somehow doesn't count as murder. This is a thing for Libertarians to believe and no one else: The categorisation of the act is what matters, aggression or not technically aggression, the nomenclature of the act, and not what is accomplished.

bjs1
Sage
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 225 times

Re: Madness

Post #5

Post by bjs1 »

[Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

The rhetoric on this topic is surprising to say the least.

On the one hand Russia has used their military might to launch and unprovoked and unjustified invasion of their neighbor which has resulted in thousands of deaths - including hundreds of civilians and dozens of children - and millions of people have been forced from their homes.

On the other hand we have Facebook posts and a canceled concert.

I am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Madness

Post #6

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

bjs1 wrote: Sat Mar 12, 2022 5:42 pm [Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

The rhetoric on this topic is surprising to say the least.

On the one hand Russia has used their military might to launch and unprovoked and unjustified invasion of their neighbor which has resulted in thousands of deaths - including hundreds of civilians and dozens of children - and millions of people have been forced from their homes.

On the other hand we have Facebook posts and a canceled concert.

I am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Perhaps it might be helpful to consider Israel and Palestinians. How do you think people would generally react if Facebook said it was permitted to call for violence against Jews in Israel/Palestine?

bjs1
Sage
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 225 times

Re: Madness

Post #7

Post by bjs1 »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:37 pm
bjs1 wrote: Sat Mar 12, 2022 5:42 pm [Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

The rhetoric on this topic is surprising to say the least.

On the one hand Russia has used their military might to launch and unprovoked and unjustified invasion of their neighbor which has resulted in thousands of deaths - including hundreds of civilians and dozens of children - and millions of people have been forced from their homes.

On the other hand we have Facebook posts and a canceled concert.

I am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Perhaps it might be helpful to consider Israel and Palestinians. How do you think people would generally react if Facebook said it was permitted to call for violence against Jews in Israel/Palestine?
Israelis and Palestinians have a long history racism and religious hatred, as well as outright violence.

The Ukraine is different. This is not a situation where both sides need to settle down. Russia is the aggressor. World politics are always complex, but Russia is solely responsible for turning to violence.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Madness

Post #8

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

bjs1 wrote: Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:21 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:37 pm
bjs1 wrote: Sat Mar 12, 2022 5:42 pm [Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

The rhetoric on this topic is surprising to say the least.

On the one hand Russia has used their military might to launch and unprovoked and unjustified invasion of their neighbor which has resulted in thousands of deaths - including hundreds of civilians and dozens of children - and millions of people have been forced from their homes.

On the other hand we have Facebook posts and a canceled concert.

I am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Perhaps it might be helpful to consider Israel and Palestinians. How do you think people would generally react if Facebook said it was permitted to call for violence against Jews in Israel/Palestine?
Israelis and Palestinians have a long history racism and religious hatred, as well as outright violence.

The Ukraine is different. This is not a situation where both sides need to settle down. Russia is the aggressor. World politics are always complex, but Russia is solely responsible for turning to violence.
Israel is in violation of a great many UN resolutions, they have invaded and stolen land and continue to build "settlements" on this land despite many UN resolutions condemning this.

e.g.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 was adopted on 23 December 2016. It concerns the Israeli settlements in "Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem". The resolution passed in a 14–0 vote by members of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). Four members with United Nations Security Council veto power, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, voted for the resolution, but the United States abstained.[1]
and
United Nations Security Council resolution 611, adopted on 25 April 1988, after recalling Resolution 573 (1985) and noting a complaint from Tunisia against Israel, the Council condemned an attack on Tunisia on 16 April 1988, in which Khalil al-Wazir, an affiliate of the Palestine Liberation Organization and founder of the Fatah political party, was assassinated. The resolution, which did not explicitly implicate Israel in the attack, was adopted by 14 votes to none, with one abstention from the United States.
and
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66/225 of 22 December 2011 was a resolution in which the United Nations General Assembly reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people and of the population of the occupied Golan Heights over their natural resources, demanded Israel to cease the exploitation, damage, cause of loss or depletion, and endangerment of that natural resources and recognized the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of Israeli violation of their rights.
and
United Nations Security Council resolution 636, adopted on 6 July 1989, after reaffirming resolutions 608 (1988) and 609 (1988) and learning of the deportation of eight Palestinians by Israel in the occupied territories on 29 June 1989, the council condemned the continued deportations and reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention referring to the protection of civilians in times of war. Resolution 636 was adopted with 14 votes to none, with one abstention from the United States.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Madness

Post #9

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Mar 14, 2022 4:14 pm
bjs1 wrote: Mon Mar 14, 2022 2:21 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Sun Mar 13, 2022 12:37 pm
bjs1 wrote: Sat Mar 12, 2022 5:42 pm [Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1]

The rhetoric on this topic is surprising to say the least.

On the one hand Russia has used their military might to launch and unprovoked and unjustified invasion of their neighbor which has resulted in thousands of deaths - including hundreds of civilians and dozens of children - and millions of people have been forced from their homes.

On the other hand we have Facebook posts and a canceled concert.

I am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Perhaps it might be helpful to consider Israel and Palestinians. How do you think people would generally react if Facebook said it was permitted to call for violence against Jews in Israel/Palestine?
Israelis and Palestinians have a long history racism and religious hatred, as well as outright violence.

The Ukraine is different. This is not a situation where both sides need to settle down. Russia is the aggressor. World politics are always complex, but Russia is solely responsible for turning to violence.
Israel is in violation of a great many UN resolutions, they have invaded and stolen land and continue to build "settlements" on this land despite many UN resolutions condemning this.

e.g.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 was adopted on 23 December 2016. It concerns the Israeli settlements in "Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem". The resolution passed in a 14–0 vote by members of the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). Four members with United Nations Security Council veto power, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom, voted for the resolution, but the United States abstained.[1]
and
United Nations Security Council resolution 611, adopted on 25 April 1988, after recalling Resolution 573 (1985) and noting a complaint from Tunisia against Israel, the Council condemned an attack on Tunisia on 16 April 1988, in which Khalil al-Wazir, an affiliate of the Palestine Liberation Organization and founder of the Fatah political party, was assassinated. The resolution, which did not explicitly implicate Israel in the attack, was adopted by 14 votes to none, with one abstention from the United States.
and
The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66/225 of 22 December 2011 was a resolution in which the United Nations General Assembly reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people and of the population of the occupied Golan Heights over their natural resources, demanded Israel to cease the exploitation, damage, cause of loss or depletion, and endangerment of that natural resources and recognized the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of Israeli violation of their rights.
and
United Nations Security Council resolution 636, adopted on 6 July 1989, after reaffirming resolutions 608 (1988) and 609 (1988) and learning of the deportation of eight Palestinians by Israel in the occupied territories on 29 June 1989, the council condemned the continued deportations and reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention referring to the protection of civilians in times of war. Resolution 636 was adopted with 14 votes to none, with one abstention from the United States.
Then we have apartheid:
Israeli authorities must be held accountable for committing the crime of apartheid against Palestinians, Amnesty International said today in a damning new report. The investigation details how Israel enforces a system of oppression and domination against the Palestinian people wherever it has control over their rights. This includes Palestinians living in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), as well as displaced refugees in other countries.

Amnesty International is calling on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to consider the crime of apartheid in its current investigation in the OPT and calls on all states to exercise universal jurisdiction to bring perpetrators of apartheid crimes to justice.

“There is no possible justification for a system built around the institutionalized and prolonged racist oppression of millions of people. Apartheid has no place in our world, and states which choose to make allowances for Israel will find themselves on the wrong side of history. Governments who continue to supply Israel with arms and shield it from accountability at the UN are supporting a system of apartheid, undermining the international legal order, and exacerbating the suffering of the Palestinian people. The international community must face up to the reality of Israel’s apartheid, and pursue the many avenues to justice which remain shamefully unexplored.”

Amnesty International’s findings build on a growing body of work by Palestinian, Israeli and international NGOs, who have increasingly applied the apartheid framework to the situation in Israel and/or the OPT.

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: Madness

Post #10

Post by Purple Knight »

bjs1 wrote: Sat Mar 12, 2022 5:42 pmI am not saying that the West is without fault, but you have called these far less severe acts "madness" and "reprehensible" while using subdued language to describe the Russian invasion. Why is that?
Maybe it's because two wrongs don't make a right and because Alexander Whatshisname didn't do anything wrong.

In any other case, treating citizens as responsible for what their country does would be called out as reprehensible, discriminatory, and evil.

In fact, treating any individual, ever, as responsible for what they did not do would be called out as reprehensible, discriminatory, and evil.

Full disclosure: I believe individualism is a luxury, not a right. But I think it's the First Luxury with capitals F and L. I think it's the first and only thing civilisation should consider buying when it can afford such luxuries, as soon as it can, and to the exclusion of all else, because it is that certainty that unless you do anything wrong, you won't be punished, that builds the trust on which anything greater than mud huts are built.

Post Reply