SIGH... having dumb friends

[Gopher Gary]

Hey, whenever you're ready to share the undertones, man. 

[Hannah]

oh boy...well this is possibly why I don't have friends or know folks that are generally that idiotic  I got off Facebook for that reason among many...I think I discussed it in one of the threads oh yes divert a Facebook post...I prefer the folks here as you all are real (being honest in how you feel your views etc.)

If someone does talk about anything remotely regarding that (it's been a while people figure out I am not listening just smiling and nodding to pacify them until they shut up)

But when it has happened my eyes glaze over and no lie I'd sleep with them open or zone out you all know 

[ZEGH8578]

Hey, whenever you're ready to share the undertones, man. 

Of the actual article she posted?
The article was extremely generic, it was just a lesson/reminder in "thinking critically", and "subtly" used certain hand-picked examples, such as Holocaust fact reliability, and the actual meaning of the word "nazi" - sortof like "you thought it meant EVIL, but actually it means NAtional soCIalist! boy don't you feel dumb now!"

those were the most glaring examples, the rest was just "important to think for yourself!"

Hannah, these aren't people who actually talk about this stuff regularily. My friend is a tree-hugging hippie, she would never knowingly side with right wing extremes - but she keeps doing it accidentally, time and time again, and every time her FB fills with other airheads going "Good article! It IS important to ask twice how many jews were gassed, after all, it's important to be fair!" good, well meaning airheads, who have NO concept of HOW AND WHY these questions keep re-surfacing.
Then she will have 1-2 people trying their nicest to tell her to be a TINY bit more careful with her sources. Again, no news source is perfect, but avoid those with a big THORS HAMMER as a logo and stuff. Swastikas, fasces, you know, "88 Sieg Heil!" these are clues.

[Gopher Gary]

Of the actual article she posted?
The article was extremely generic, it was just a lesson/reminder in "thinking critically", and "subtly" used certain hand-picked examples, such as Holocaust fact reliability, and the actual meaning of the word "nazi" - sortof like "you thought it meant EVIL, but actually it means NAtional soCIalist! boy don't you feel dumb now!"

those were the most glaring examples, the rest was just "important to think for yourself!"

Thanks, Zeg, and yeah, that doesn't really sound like some deeply hidden undertone. 

[ZEGH8578]

It might be Americans in general are more used to overt propaganda, since you have a much more direct approach to free speech and assembly. In Europe we have outright banned certain aspects of it, as "incitement of hate". This isn't about protecting people's feelings from hateful stuff, but the fact that perpetuated propaganda might incite actual violence. People are quick to react as if WW2 was almost fiction "LOL as if thatll ever happen again!" "LOL as if Rwanda is comparable to europe" "LOL as if 2000 georgians make a genocide LOOOL" but it just keeps happening, in all shapes and forms.

So, direct, overt propaganda, especially angled towards anything reminiscent of nazi stuff, is clamped down upon hard. Not that I mind at all. But that also means we are more alert to individual channels of propaganda, there will be news stories and stuff. You guys got the KKK and stuff, it's more in the open.

[Jack]

On the same token, suppressing it just makes it sneaky, and intelligently designed to be sneaky with undertones easily denied as even existing.

[ZEGH8578]

On the same token, suppressing it just makes it sneaky, and intelligently designed to be sneaky with undertones easily denied as even existing.

Yes, but at least it is contained a bit.

I keep suggesting to round them up and exterminate them, but that is apparently not good, and will make me "the same as they are", although I don't aggree with that.
So, untill that, then contain and supress. Everything can't be free. Example: Me. I should not be free to assemble and speek my mind as I please, and a lot of my socio-political opinions are harmful to society
I joke of course, I don't genuinely want genocides and stuff, but if I did, I'd keep it to myself. Private sphere.

This whole free-speech thing should be about common sense anyway.
It's about "discussing soundly" an idea.
Where does the line go?
What if I describe detailed texts, highly manipulative in nature, about how little time there is left, how we must act now, before it is too late, and drive all the outlanders away, by force if necesary? That was what Fjordland had been writing, freely, and he was openly credited by Breivik for being his driving force. Imagine how awkward Fjordland felt

But these things have real reprecussions.
We know it and we see it.

Freedom of expression has tons of little limitations that we take for granted anyway, copyright for example. I can't just decide to express something someone else has expressed, word by word, even if my expression is free. I also can't decide to express myself through fashion by dressing exactly as a uniformed police officer. And so on. Nitpicking now, but you get the point. Principles should end up being about something practical and common-sensy, not just being a rule.

[Jack]

Even in the US, freedom of speech has it's limitations, though similar undercurrents exist even though those limitations are not the direct cause. People camouflage garbage with seemingly common sense ideals, and people don't necessarily realize they're supporting garbage because it's being discussed so soundly and rationally. It's not really contained, it's an illusion of being contained, but it's only hidden. Isn't that what this thread is about? 

[ZEGH8578]

Even in the US, freedom of speech has it's limitations, though similar undercurrents exist even though those limitations are not the direct cause. People camouflage garbage with seemingly common sense ideals, and people don't necessarily realize they're supporting garbage because it's being discussed so soundly and rationally. It's not really contained, it's an illusion of being contained, but it's only hidden. Isn't that what this thread is about?

Yes
For a marginalized group desperate for beefing up their ranks, camoflaging their material is essential. Being too open and honest will do them nothing good, since their message is often harsh and impersonal and cruel, and people simply don't respond well to that - at least not so openly.
By adding a bit of normalization, they legitimize themselves even more "nono, hating immigrants is only a small fraction of what we believe in. We also feel strongly about preserving the rare panda!" "GASP! Me too : O"

[Jack]

So then we agree? Free speech shouldn't really be about only allowing people to speak soundly with common sense. If you genuinely wanted genocides and stuff, then I'm inclined to allow you to say that openly without hiding behind pandas, so I can at the very least be aware of who you are.

[ZEGH8578]

So then we agree? Free speech shouldn't really be about only allowing people to speak soundly with common sense. If you genuinely wanted genocides and stuff, then I'm inclined to allow you to say that openly without hiding behind pandas, so I can at the very least be aware of who you are.

Here is the problem:
Society consists of smart people and dumb people.

The free-speech limitation, is in place to prevent smart people from REACHING dumb people.
So far, it works pretty well. All the numbnuts I know are busy doing numbnut stuff, like fixing cars, farting, laughing at dumb comedies. None of them are browsing nazi material.

The dumb is the target audience. So by containing, to best effort, aggressive propaganda, you can keep it from reaching the impressionable, and thus DELAY the slowly inevitable.
(as in, people are tempted by cruelty and destruction, especially the next-generation-after-the-previous-who-experienced-it, it has to do with the constant generational contrasts that are also responsible for changing the language "I'm different from my parents!!!" if parents were in war, then you are different by not being in war. If your parents are children of peace, then you don't want to be lame, and want to be a warrior! Very simplified, but often observable)

But yes, we agree, and I totally see your point - like I say, the ultimate effect is inevitable, because the propaganda is there, and seeps out, drop by drop. But I maintain that containment successfully delays this, and allows for a normal population to experience as many decades as possible of normalcy, before shit hits the fan.

[Jack]

Will have to simply disagree then, because limitations make dumb people not realize what they're supporting, like your dumb friend who may not be browsing Nazi sites, but still unknowingly manages to spread and promote their cleverly limited propaganda. Also suppressing these things until the shit hits the fan creates extreme cases of civil unrest which can make the wrong people look like the bad guys, because they're the ones on a murderous rioting rampage in the streets attacking anything and everything. They don't even know their aggressor, so quiet and intelligently hidden, and then an oblivious society having experienced entirely too much normalcy is shocked and deeply frightened by the wrong thing.

[ZEGH8578]

Will have to simply disagree then, because limitations make dumb people not realize what they're supporting, like your dumb friend who may not be browsing Nazi sites, but still unknowingly manages to spread and promote their cleverly limited propaganda. Also suppressing these things until the shit hits the fan creates extreme cases of civil unrest which can make the wrong people look like the bad guys, because they're the ones on a murderous rioting rampage in the streets attacking anything and everything. They don't even know their aggressor, so quiet and intelligently hidden, and then an oblivious society having experienced entirely too much normalcy is shocked and deeply frightened by the wrong thing.

I agree that this is the eventual outcome. We have to take into account things that allready are tho, for example, stability in immigrant-soaked western Europe for 50 years straight, despite so many voices against it. It is easy to form pogroms, and chase and harass. Why did this not happen all over the place?
We take long periods of stability for granted, and we credit our own selves for it "we're so awesome : )" but a lot of this is orchestrated and planned.

But I do see your points, and you are right, because what you are describing - is happening.
I'm seeing this as a problem without solution, only with an option to delay. The way I see it - a successful delay = mission accomplished.

[Jack]

See it as the opposite, successful delay is mission failure. It's somewhat similar in the US, but only with political correctness as the driving force rather than actual laws. You recently made a comment about how people and societies hold on to these things forever, generations later still the same wounds exist for people who only read of real wounds in history books. It boils down to emotions, and emotions are never logical. People are made to feel uncomfortable and even legally unacceptable in expressing emotions without disguising their emotion as intelligently sensible or logical, and that's why societies wounds aren't allowed to heal. Not certain if it's a problem with a solution either, but do believe that suppressing a problem never leads to a solution. 

[ZEGH8578]

See it as the opposite, successful delay is mission failure. It's somewhat similar in the US, but only with political correctness as the driving force rather than actual laws. You recently made a comment about how people and societies hold on to these things forever, generations later still the same wounds exist for people who only read of real wounds in history books. It boils down to emotions, and emotions are never logical. People are made to feel uncomfortable and even legally unacceptable in expressing emotions without disguising their emotion as intelligently sensible or logical, and that's why societies wounds aren't allowed to heal. Not certain if it's a problem with a solution either, but do believe that suppressing a problem never leads to a solution.

You do make points, but in the end, retributional acts will be inevitable.
All human geopolitics are just large-scale waiting games anyway. What we percieve as anomalies, sudden, unexpected, are simply a continuation of the conquest-processes, economical or territorial conquests. The world map will continue to change, and those in power will do everything they can to drive towards the ultimate goal, the goal we all know, the domination of all the world
It is "the secret" driving force of all politics. That and pussy, pussy is like the God of everything, but it's a secret, nobody admits it

As long as it is inevitable, which I believe it is, uncurable, unfixable, then delaying the inevitable is the only solution.
If we "zoom out", we would be looking at a frequency scale:

[------------------------------------------------timeframe----------------------------------------------------]
[-----stability-----][chaos][-----stability-----][chaos][-----stability-----][chaos][-----stability-----][chaos] Suppressed, one less chaos, years of prosperity for innocent people.
[--stability--][chaos][--stability--][chaos][--stability--][chaos][--stability--][chaos][--stability--][chaos]    Unsupressed, one more chaos, one more round of destruction.

It's not a solution, but maybe a mild remedy :I