Yaxley-Lennon again!!!

Sepp Blatter

Goat Molester
Patron
Where did I say that you were alleging it was a conspiracy? I was making a general point about the hysteria that academia tends to attract from those who fail to understand the way in which it works and/or have bees in the bonnets about how academia is a hotbed of lefties plotting revolution and brain washing the gullible. (cf the UCLAN thread the other day)

The general point is that the rights of free speech carry with them the responsibilities of using that gift appropriately. When your rights to free speech impinge upon my rights as a citizen we have a problem
Got you - because you replied, I thought you were debating the point. Not that we argue much or anything :D

Not a fan of the PC conspiracy, I must admit - I don't see a concerted effort to bring in a 1984-style censorship. What I do see is a group think in action, sometimes - and a tendency to apply the political correctness of academic discourse to society, where it does not always belong because it strips out all context from a word or phrase. Add in social media where offence and outrage can spread quickly, and you have a potential problem.

Fully agree with your final comment - that is an area where there is no correct answer about where to draw the line. You and I may differ slightly in our approaches to free speech - I tend more towards the absolute/libertarian end of the spectrum than you, while appreciating the caveats. That said, we both agree on the principles, I think - that's the most important thing.
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
Got you - because you replied, I thought you were debating the point. Not that we argue much or anything :D

Not a fan of the PC conspiracy, I must admit - I don't see a concerted effort to bring in a 1984-style censorship. What I do see is a group think in action, sometimes - and a tendency to apply the political correctness of academic discourse to society, where it does not always belong because it strips out all context from a word or phrase. Add in social media where offence and outrage can spread quickly, and you have a potential problem.

Fully agree with your final comment - that is an area where there is no correct answer about where to draw the line. You and I may differ slightly in our approaches to free speech - I tend more towards the absolute/libertarian end of the spectrum than you, while appreciating the caveats. That said, we both agree on the principles, I think - that's the most important thing.
We argue because you fail to grasp the fact that I'm always right ;-)

Objectivity will always win over subjectivity in my world, so I dont have a problem with stripping away layers of hysteria/pejorative language/bollocks in order to get to the kernel of the issue. IMO the use of emotive language will always obfuscate rather then clarify
 

Sepp Blatter

Goat Molester
Patron
We argue because you fail to grasp the fact that I'm always right ;-)

Objectivity will always win over subjectivity in my world, so I dont have a problem with stripping away layers of hysteria/pejorative language/bollocks in order to get to the kernel of the issue. IMO the use of emotive language will always obfuscate rather then clarify
We argue because I like to let you think you are right, sometimes ;D

I agree and disagree with your statement - objectivity is part of critical analysis and you are perfectly correct about that. Where I disagree is the other side, when producing language. Emotion and subjectivity are absolutely crucial to that, especially for a creative like me - that's why I am very wary about banning words and phrases, or controlling language through legislation or excessive social ostracising.

A couple of leading questions (I like such things, as you know full well) - going back to my original point about context in the Dankula case, is it always wrong to say 'Gas the Jews?' Is the word 'Paki' racist?

My answers are no and not necessarily :)
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
We argue because I like to let you think you are right, sometimes ;D

I agree and disagree with your statement - objectivity is part of critical analysis and you are perfectly correct about that. Where I disagree is the other side, when producing language. Emotion and subjectivity are absolutely crucial to that, especially for a creative like me - that's why I am very wary about banning words and phrases, or controlling language through legislation or excessive social ostracising.

A couple of leading questions (I like such things, as you know full well) - going back to my original point about context in the Dankula case, is it always wrong to say 'Gas the Jews?' Is the word 'Paki' racist?

My answers are no and not necessarily :)
There is always the question of context. There's a difference between a playwright or novelist using specific words and phrases and someone on social media or in BTL comments or in a public arena using the same words. We always need to ask what is the purpose.
 

Nobber

Forum Patron
Patron
That's right, a non-Muslim women thought, I'll get a few Muslim women to come and get a bit of exercise for £5 a pop at Beeston community centre. She gets death threats from a man paid a lot more by an American billionaire. Then you come on blathering about enforced segregation. Do something useful, you, Joan and the monkey should get your yellow vests on and toddle off down the flag market and see how many follow you. 👴🏻🙍🐒
⚓
 

pnematic

Manager
Where did I say that you were alleging it was a conspiracy? I was making a general point about the hysteria that academia tends to attract from those who fail to understand the way in which it works and/or have bees in the bonnets about how academia is a hotbed of lefties plotting revolution and brain washing the gullible. (cf the UCLAN thread the other day)

The general point is that the rights of free speech carry with them the responsibilities of using that gift appropriately. When your rights to free speech impinge upon my rights as a citizen we have a problem
Come on Essex - an enlightened chap like yourself cannot deny that theres been some ridiculous non platforming , shut down of debate and downright nonsense displayed by some universities.

And yes - I do think some of that is driven by the ideology of lecturers.
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
Come on Essex - an enlightened chap like yourself cannot deny that theres been some ridiculous non platforming , shut down of debate and downright nonsense displayed by some universities.

And yes - I do think some of that is driven by the ideology of lecturers.
I agree that non platforming is, as a general rule, counter productive and counter to the purpose of higher education. I do however believe that there are a few exceptions where there is justification for banning speakers (where their attendance and activity may lead to our laws being broken for example). As a general principle, I wouldnt want to ban anyone.

There are plenty of different ideologies present across the academic spectrum.....the idea that all university lecturers are lefties is a throwback to the 70s. Certain areas of academia are more likely to attract the lefties you get worked up about :)
 

Winkytinky

First Team
I'm just waiting for the outrage about curtailing free speech.....
Take it you're not on fb then? All the cognitively challenged are going into "freedom of speach" melt down. I read a comment by some bloke who said he was ready to take up arms 👀
 

Sepp Blatter

Goat Molester
Patron
I'm just waiting for the outrage about curtailing free speech.....
Some folks do fail to understand that free speech only applies to the public sphere.

I fully support Yaxley-Lennon's freedom of speech. I also respect the right of private companies to refuse to publish his views.
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
Take it you're not on fb then? All the cognitively challenged are going into "freedom of speach" melt down. I read a comment by some bloke who said he was ready to take up arms 👀
Strewth no I'm not on FB....I've got a life ;)

The level of stupidity never fails to amaze
 

PNEESSEX

Forum Patron
Patron
Some folks do fail to understand that free speech only applies to the public sphere.

I fully support Yaxley-Lennon's freedom of speech. I also respect the right of private companies to refuse to publish his views.
He needs prosecuting every time he breaks the law......
 

Sepp Blatter

Goat Molester
Patron
There is always the question of context. There's a difference between a playwright or novelist using specific words and phrases and someone on social media or in BTL comments or in a public arena using the same words. We always need to ask what is the purpose.
Exactly - that's why the idea of context not being important in the Dankula case worried me.

It's certainly a complex issue - we have been down the road of free speech in terms of social media, BTL, and wider society. We largely agree, albeit that I am very liberal when it comes to free speech (Too liberal? That's a fair question). I am a fan of Steven Pinker - he's pretty much where am am concerning freedom of expression.

In terms of art etc., I am very concerned about recent trends and pressures on artists and publishers afraid of public outcries. I am not a fan of stripping contentious language out of classic books or banning them from classrooms - they are a product of their time and should be discussed as such. Even modern writers are coming under pressure to self-censor, which is a trend I do not like.

An interesting article from Lionel Shriver, if you have time:



Growing up, I had a strong interest in US censorship by the 'Moral Majority' based on 'Christian Values,' with acts such as arresting Jello Biafra for obscenity, or Tipper Gore's Christian fundies going after musicians for questionable lyrics (won't somebody think of the children!). I am concerned that there is a new moral majority being created, which sees nothing wrong with trying to ban things that they do not like because they 'trigger' someone.
 

Waltz

First Team
Take it you're not on fb then? All the cognitively challenged are going into "freedom of speach" melt down. I read a comment by some bloke who said he was ready to take up arms 👀
Not just FB that people take ridiculous posturing positions. Some of the posters on here are advocating bombing the camp full of women and children that Shamina Begum is at.
 

Winkytinky

First Team
Not just FB that people take ridiculous posturing positions. Some of the posters on here are advocating bombing the camp full of women and children that Shamina Begum is at.
Good grief, it pains me that she's being used as a distraction.
 
Top