Charlottesville garbage

[Marcus]

17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

On the idea part, this comment show a preference for race as a fundamental principle.

I don't think that way. The deepest fundament to me is initiating violence against innocents. It makes no difference to me if a person who bashes my head in was prompted by a race supremacist or by a "self-serving trouble-starter."

The bashed-in part of my head can't tell the difference.

Even in formal Objectivism, force versus mind, not racial attitude, is where the moral premise battle is fought. Racism (which is bad) is less fundamental on the ethical hierarchy.

Michael

 

@Michael Stuart Kelly You were making a moral equivalence. You equivocated a White Supremacist and Nazi, whose movement and idealogy has historically killed and destroyed the lives of untold millions of people with the low-brow, profit seeking political opportunism of Al Sharpton (Al Sharption is many things but not an advocate of genocide or violence). This is worse than a dumb comparison, it's dangerous and  intellectually dishonest. That is what I addressed.

Terrible error on your part and I was a bit surprised you even said it. Making false equivalencies is certainly not how you win arguments.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

13 minutes ago, Marcus said:

This is worse than a dumb comparison, it's dangerous and  intellectually dishonest.

I'm restricting you.

Some people just don't understand simple English and I will not have this crap here.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

If anyone is in doubt about the principle here, you're not allowed to insult the site owner. And even then, I give warnings and lots of blah blah blah in explaining it before I take action.

I don't insult owners of other places in which I want to be at and interact with others at, and I see no reason to tolerate it here.

I'll eventually lift the pre-approval-of-posts restriction for this poster should he continue and his posts become more respectful. But it's going to take some time (if it happens) since this one has a gigantic chip on his shoulder.

Incidentally, I was not engaged in moral equivalency. But I am not going to debate it in this context, especially with someone who doesn't understand--or refuses to acknowledge--conceptual hierarchy. I'm just noting my position in case anyone had any doubts.

Michael

[merjet]

1 hour ago, Marcus said:

 

@Michael Stuart Kelly You were making a moral equivalence. You equivocated a White Supremacist and Nazi, whose movement and idealogy has historically killed and destroyed the lives of untold millions of people with the low-brow, profit seeking political opportunism of Al Sharpton (Al Sharption is many things but not an advocate of genocide or violence). This is worse than a dumb comparison, it's dangerous and  intellectually dishonest. That is what I addressed.

Terrible error on your part and I was a bit surprised you even said it. Making false equivalencies is certainly not how you win arguments.

You were dishonest. All MSK said about Sharpton was, "Look at how many times Al Sharpton went to the White House, for instance."

[Brant Gaede]

Some trolls are trolls because they are malicious and others because they are dumb. On the face of it, dumb is the rarer. Underneath, it's all dumb.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

My whole stance throughout this Charlottesville thing is what rational individualism looks like, at least to me, in the middle of collectivist and tribal meltdowns in the media.

I resist the siren's call to join a mob, and the nanny's demand to be shamed into joining a mob, even though a good lynching might be at hand. I do grant that lynchings are entertaining , but there are much better things in life to engage with deep emotion. (Building great works, for instance.)

People sure like lynchings, though...

Michael

[Peter]

Michael wrote: My whole stance throughout this Charlottesville thing is what rational individualism looks like, at least to me, in the middle of collectivist and tribal meltdowns in the media. end quote

Were President Trump’s thoughts about Charlottesville, rational and individualistic? I think so, and at times his words were surprisingly “deep thoughts” too. If you support free speech, that means you may not agree with what was said in Charlottesville, but as the cliché goes, you support their right to say it.

Someone on Fox said that Charlottesville was one of the most left wing cities in America. I don’t know about that, but it seemed somewhat progressive when I lived there, but definitely not as progressive as Frisco. (My Mom was born there and every time I said Frisco instead of San Fran . . . she would have a fit.)

Peter