Children of the 70s

[classic33]

I used to play on a couple of the local building sites, mainly Irish I spoke to then and it's still possible to tell the Irish on any roadworks. They'll be the one with the shovel in their hands. Little has changed over the last 40 years. My opinion, but I still talk to those with the shovel in their hands.

 

[TheDoctor]

Locking this for now.
It may be back, after a cleanup. Or not.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Locking this for now.
It may be back, after a cleanup. Or not.

Thread purged, reopened: please do continue in a civilized manner.
Cheers!

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Actually, I was never keen on Bless This House, but I quite liked Please, Sir!

Maybe they ought to show Love thy Neighbour again just to show how things have changed, whether some think it has or not.

 

[Blue Hills]

Maybe they ought to show Love thy Neighbour again just to show how things have changed, whether some think it has or not.

Who said things haven't changed?
History moves on. Always has
And isn't linear.
It's definiitely not a one way ticket to endless improvement as some seem to imagine.
Maybe some folk are so "with it", "in", or like to think they are, that they are stuck in 2019, have no perspective.

 

[Slow But Determined]

Didn't get chance to read all the posts before purging but we do need people like SM or discussion becomes very one dimensional.

Whilst not for or against the National Front (as they were then called) as a youngster growing up I could never understand why they were banned from having a Party Political Broadcast in a democracy.

You do need to hear all sides of an argument but it appears that more and more we are living in a censored world.

Disclaimer: This post is merely my way of trying to say that perhaps speech isn't as free as we like to think and is in no way supportive / dismissive of any of the previous posters / viewpoints.

 

[Mugshot]

Didn't get chance to read all the posts before purging but we do need people like SM or discussion becomes very one dimensional.

Whilst not for or against the National Front (as they were then called) as a youngster growing up I could never understand why they were banned from having a Party Political Broadcast in a democracy.

You do need to hear all sides of an argument but it appears that more and more we are living in a censored world.

Disclaimer: This post is merely my way of trying to say that perhaps speech isn't as free as we like to think and is in no way supportive / dismissive of any of the previous posters / viewpoints.

I agree that the opportunity to hear views like those of SM is necessary, they should be subject to proper scrutiny and rebuttal. I think the issue could be that SM is slinging them around into various threads, he has been invited to start a thread of his own on the subject but obviously hasn't done so yet. Maybe the mods could hoover his relevant posts up and start the thread for him and we can see where we end up?

 

[nickyboy]

Didn't get chance to read all the posts before purging but we do need people like SM or discussion becomes very one dimensional.

Whilst not for or against the National Front (as they were then called) as a youngster growing up I could never understand why they were banned from having a Party Political Broadcast in a democracy.

You do need to hear all sides of an argument but it appears that more and more we are living in a censored world.

Disclaimer: This post is merely my way of trying to say that perhaps speech isn't as free as we like to think and is in no way supportive / dismissive of any of the previous posters / viewpoints.

The specific reason is that there is legislation preventing such things as "Inciting to Racial Hatred" and that's why organisations who espouse a racist ideology aren't given airtime

Regarding SM, he's obviously bitter and angry about the world he lives in and his place in society. So he blames anyone but the person he should really blame, himself

 

[mudsticks]

Didn't get chance to read all the posts before purging but we do need people like SM or discussion becomes very one dimensional.

Whilst not for or against the National Front (as they were then called) as a youngster growing up I could never understand why they were banned from having a Party Political Broadcast in a democracy.

You do need to hear all sides of an argument but it appears that more and more we are living in a censored world.

Disclaimer: This post is merely my way of trying to say that perhaps speech isn't as free as we like to think and is in no way supportive / dismissive of any of the previous posters / viewpoints.

Freedom of speech also demands exercising of the responsibility that goes alongside that freedom.

Are you suggesting cycle chat should allow racism, xenophobia, or discrimination on grounds of religious belief, gender, nationality, sexuality, background etc??

We've just seen the horrific results of hate speech, hate thinking, divisiveness and othering.

If 'free speech' leads to violence being done to others, leads to their right to life being taken away even, where is the 'freedom' in that.

I grew up in the seventies, and because of my parents jobs I was lucky enough to come into contact with people from a wide range of backgrounds, cultures, and nations.

It was a massively enriching part of my childhood, and gave me an early insight into how humans are humans, with the same basic needs, but individual worries, delights, beliefs, aspirations and experiences.

We don't need freedom to express or incite hatred, it diminishes us all.

 

[Slow But Determined]

Freedom of speech also demands exercising of the responsibility that goes alongside that freedom.

Are you suggesting cycle chat should allow racism, xenophobia, or discrimination on grounds of religious belief, gender, nationality, sexuality, background etc??

I guess you either didn't read or chose to ignore my disclaimer.

 

[mudsticks]

I guess you either didn't read or chose to ignore my disclaimer.

Yes I did, I saw it..

But I was responding to the bit about 'freedom of speech' as an out and out right, the responsibilities that come with fos, and how it needs not to become freedom to incite hatred.

 

[Markymark]

It’s impossible to have purest freedom of anything else the mightier will suppress the weaker.
Freedom of speech must have rules else it can be used to suppress the minority.

As an example, roads should be fir everyone. It doesn’t mean everyone can drive what they want else I’d buy a tank a squash everything in my way. If roads are for all there must be restrictions on the most dangerous.

Public parks are free for everyone. But I can’t practice my chainsaw juggling there.

Expression is free for everyone but I can’t use it to incite violence or use it for illegal purposes.

In summary, if freedom means the mightier can suppress the minority making them unable to have freedom then the mightier should have restrictions so the freedom is available to all.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Who said things haven't changed?

There are some on here who believe that the wider group are living in the past where misogyny, racism, religious intolerance were acceptable & love to try by twisting their words to belittle them at every opportunity. Normally they keep themselves to themselves in the dark place but sometimes they come out as a group to get fresh meat.

 

[Mugshot]

Freedom of speech also demands exercising of the responsibility that goes alongside that freedom.

Are you suggesting cycle chat should allow racism, xenophobia, or discrimination on grounds of religious belief, gender, nationality, sexuality, background etc??

We've just seen the horrific results of hate speech, hate thinking, divisiveness and othering.

If 'free speech' leads to violence being done to others, leads to their right to life being taken away even, where is the 'freedom' in that.

I grew up in the seventies, and because of my parents jobs I was lucky enough to come into contact with people from a wide range of backgrounds, cultures, and nations.

It was a massively enriching part of my childhood, and gave me an early insight into how humans are humans, with the same basic needs, but individual worries, delights, beliefs, aspirations and experiences.

We don't need freedom to express or incite hatred, it diminishes us all.

It's impossible to shut it down though. You can ignore the hate speech on twitter and facebook, and you can ignore the myriad of websites dedicated to it, and you can ignore the front pages of the Mail and Express, but that doesn't make it go away. Ignoring the issue leads to radicalisation, with no counter to the arguments you are left with only one perspective. I think that the ignoring of hate speech has helped to lead us to the situation we are in today. We should be far more pro-active when it comes to pointing it out and challenging it.

 

[mudsticks]

It's impossible to shut it down though. You can ignore the hate speech on twitter and facebook, and you can ignore the myriad of websites dedicated to it, and you can ignore the front pages of the Mail and Express, but that doesn't make it go away. Ignoring the issue leads to radicalisation, with no counter to the arguments you are left with only one perspective. I think that the ignoring of hate speech has helped to lead us to the situation we are in today. We should be far more pro-active when it comes to pointing it out and challenging it.

Yes I agree, and I generally do.

Despite exhortations from many to 'ignore the haters'
Because as you say, those ignored haters gather into groups to back up each others unpleasant dehumanising views, radicalising each other, and even plot to act on that hatred.

I will usually call it out - often a fairly thankless task, you get labelled as 'right on' or 'virtue signaller' or 'bleeding heart liberal'

You name it.

But specific to here I don't know what mods should do.

Annotate dodgy posts with "this is an example of hate speech"

Call in the cavalry to refute it?

That would be another job of work again wouldn't it.

If we can't be self policing, then I guess someone has to do it for us??