The nation of my heart.
The problem there is that you can’t measure that on a test or with other objective criteria, and these days, schools and teachers are increasingly in thrall to their students’ scores on the various state-mandated tests.
So above a certain level, the schools start being judged on their test scores, and since there’s no way to realistically, fairly and consistently assign a student a critical thinking score, it tends to get left out of the exams, and they focus more on more concrete skill assessments. This means that teachers and schools naturally then emphasize those sorts of skills/knowledge, since they’re being judged on how their students do on those sorts of things.
I’d love to see critical thinking and creativity as a core theme throughout a student’s education- much like say… STEM/STEAM stuff seems to be being pushed currently. But until there’s some way to consistently and broadly assess a student’s skill at it, I doubt that’ll happen in today’s environment of state-mandated testing.
Your definition of ‘bigot’ seems very descriptive … of a majority of Trump supporters.
Is it bigotry to oppose Nazis? I don’t think so — they are not a racial or ethnic group.
Is it bigotry to oppose the Ku Klux Klan? The Cosa Nostra?
Why do you think the Republican Party belongs on a pedestal different from the Nazis, Klan or Mob?
I think some of you object to lumping ‘Republicans’ with the ‘Trumpists.’ But look at the numbers! Trump got more votes than Romney did, or any Republican in history for that matter. Sure, there are Republicans who didn’t vote for Trump, and that group may be disproportionately represented on this Board. But simple arithmetic should convince that Hillary-voting Republicans are a very tiny set.
Are all Nazis evil? Maybe not: “Some are good people.” 
But most of us would have no problem branding the entire group evil and asking the ‘good Nazis’ to repudiate their membership.
I think asahi would be delighted to welcome and admire Republicans who repudiate their heinous Party. Until then, they’re as complicit as the hypothetical ‘good people Nazis.’
I’m sure you consider yourself a swell guy, but all I have to judge you on is your actions.
We have a real problem in this country with right wing extremism. We have right wing militias that have killed hundreds of people. We have radicalized right wing extremists who go on murder sprees. We have right wing propaganda disguised as popular news that spews hate 24 hours a day. We have a president who supports hatred. We have forums dedicated to right wing hate.
And here you are, claiming to be opposed to hate speech, but tremendously silent in the face of that hatred.
We had a guy in this thread using thinly disguised ‘white genocide’ language—a specific type of hate speech that has been used to justify mass murder here in the US. Did you challenge his hate speech? No you fucking did not.
We had a guy here using “NPC” hate language—a specific type of hate speech that has been used to justify mass murder here in the US. Did you challenge his hate speech? No you fucking did not.
Remember when you were ‘opposed’ to online bullying? Dr Ford fled her home in fear for her life simply for talking about the day a right winger attempted to rape her. Did you speak up to challenge the online bullying then? No you fucking did not.
So why don’t you take your ‘concern’—that mysteriously never concerns you enough to speak up against the right wing extremists who are actually causing the problems—and shove it up your ass.
Ok… wait that’s so-called ‘hate speech’ now sorry. And sorry in advance for the expression of ideas that may be thought crimes based on future standards.
So, I reject the idea that symbols or words are intrinsically hate speech. If folks on this board want to label Republicans, even pre Orangemanbad!, all sorts of vile names then those folks can get a little harmless teasing back.
I missed it. But since it wasn’t directed at me, and we’ve had several years of attacks and insults and threats and “fuck your feelings” directed at us, it’s real hard to give a fuck at this point.
It’s not harmless teasing. It’s hate speech:
[ul]
[li]It’s designed to dehumanize a group of people—-which you knew, because that’s explicitly how you used it[/li][li]It’s designed to characterize a group of people as subhuman—which you knew, because that’s how you used it[/li][li]It’s language currently being used by right wing extremists to radicalize people—which you damn sure should know[/li][li]It’s language which has used by mass murderers/terrorists to justify their acts of murder and terrorism—which I think you do know[/li][/ul]
You used hate speech to dehumanize liberals. And not just any random hate speech—you picked extremist language that has recently been used to justify the murder of completely innocent people. So, here’s an idea: fuck you.
FTR, as far the rules of the board go, that’s absolutely not hate speech in any way.
Pretty sure that goes for places where there are actual laws against hate speech too, but IANAL so I can’t say for sure.
Excuse me if I don’t view that as a big fucking surprise…
On the one hand it’s difficult to put explicit hate speech guidelines in place. Something like “NPC” is designed to be a code word—people who aren’t in the in-group aren’t supposed to know what it really means. And if you ban it they’ll just move to a different code word. Remember when Fox News kept calling completely innocent black kids “thugs”? Or “urban”?. They’ll pick relatively common words so you’re never sure what type of person you’re talking to. “Canadian” was (and perhaps still is) another code word for blacks—but perhaps the guy who doesn’t like Canadians just isn’t a fan of excessive politeness. The guy with 88 in his user name may have been born in 1988. The guy with 14 in his user name may have been behind 13 other people who liked the same name.
But when someone uses coded hate speech in a way that makes it clear they knew what they were doing, perhaps we should treat them equivalently to someone who used an actual banned word. If you ban “NPC” you’ll ban someone who just came here to discuss Baldur’s Gate (and that person would probably be a benefit to the site). But do you really want to keep around the guy who uses coded hate words in a way that makes it extremely clear what he intended to say?
Octopus wasn’t discussing Baldur’s Gate; he was talking about how liberals are less than insects, and he was using language that was coded because decent people would find the concept repellent. Maybe he doesn’t get banned for that, but people who claim to be against hate speech should damn sure be saying something about it.
Oh grow the fuck up. Here’s a thread where the other side is dehumanized, which I should mention you don’t see them running to the mods about it. But when it gets thrown back at them the weasels starting collectively lose their shit and start calling for mommy in a pit thread no less. Weak, pathetic and hypocritical.
Get on yer tasselled hipster bike, and peddle the fuck outta here back to Portland.
Do you think the OP of this thread is also hate speech?
So-called ‘hate speech’ is quite often nothing more than an attempt to censor inconvenient speech. Is there real hate speech? Sure. But a bit of ridicule that hive minded individuals reflexively parrot canned responses doesn’t fit that definition, whatever it is, imo. In a thread where violence is advocated against a political party and historically dehumanizing language is used I don’t see any problem at all with a bit of much deserved ridicule.
You know, if you’re going to whine about liberals calling people animal names, you probably shouldn’t call them weasels in the same post. That bit about hypocrisy turning your criticisms of others into criticism of yourself and yourself alone weren’t octopus-specific; that’s a standard rule of reality. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones because due to breaking your own walls the stones don’t reach the other person’s house.
Yeah, I would probably have banned (or at the least suspended) the OP if I ran the site.
But also, let me be clear, I find left wing hate speech significantly less troublesome than right wing hate speech because, simply put, left wing extremists aren’t killing people.
In an alternate universe where Wolf News, the most popular news station in the country, spews out hate 24 hours a day against right wingers. And armed left wing militias have killed hundreds of people. And radicalized left wing youth occasionally walk into churches to go on murder sprees. And the president is preaching hate…in that universe I wouldn’t care about someone like Ale focusing only on hate speech from the left wing, because that would be where the problem was. But I don’t live in that universe—I live in this one. And in his universe the problem that needs addressed is that right wing extremists are killing people.
What’s hypocritical? I said I wasn’t surprised, but I didn’t call for squat.
So in other words people who want to be complete jackasses like the OP and his mentally deranged supporters have free reign to say what they wish because if they get critiqued in turn the ones doing the critiquing are hypocrits? In what world does that make any sense?
That’s just not true. You have a very limited knowledge of history. Left wing extremists have historically killed more than an order of magnitude more than even the real Nazis. Pick up a book.
You know, I used to think that I was joking before in the SDMB about many conservatives having a congenital problem by not being able to notice timelines or the march of time…
Used to think…
Also, since Stalin and buddies also liked to get rid of liberals, I think you do need remedial history courses.
So just forget about history because it’s inconvenient? You guys are making Idiocracy and 1984 look like prophecies.