The red star signature is a nice touch. I wonder if Mencius qualifies as a kulak?
PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
71–80 of 122 posts
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#72It is correct and proper to shun and revile a person who actually advocates slavery. To say, "Well, as long as he is not advocating slavery at the con, that's fine." is ridiculous. Throw the racist evil nasty bum out and let someone else who actually deserves the timeslot talk.
Condemn what the man says, not the man. He may have some interesting or insightful things to say about other topics like Computer Science. I disagree with everyone on at least one topic... throw them all under the bus because of that?
The logical implication of someone advocating slavery is that they also advocate psychotic violence and cruelty. I do condemn him, indeed, he has condemned himself.
There are myriad other people who "may have some interesting or insightful things to say about other topics", yes? Let one of them have his spot.
You just don't get to advocate slavery and then walk around and give talks at cons like a person. That is just not how it works. This guy is scum. There ain't really anything controversial about that.
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#73I a brown person. I am curious what will not allowing him speak achieve. Will it teach him a lesson? Would he change his views at a deep fundamental level?
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#74It is correct and proper to shun and revile a person who actually advocates slavery. To say, "Well, as long as he is not advocating slavery at the con, that's fine." is ridiculous. Throw the racist evil nasty bum out and let someone else who actually deserves the timeslot talk.
Where is the line though? Should radically conservative parts of the south bar anyone who has advocated for gay marriage from speaking at tech conferences?
The line is right there: Slavery.
This is not some slippery slope, and it's not about opinion.
It is not an "opinion" to advocate slavery. It is madness.
This is not about some group saying "we're all one" and some other group saying "no, the darkies should be enslaved" and it being some difference of opinion or something. This is about humanity versus bestial cruelty and psychotic violence.
Gay people aren't doing anything wrong.
Slavery advocates are doing something very wrong.
This isn't confusing and it's not a matter of subjective opinion.
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the line though? Should radically conservative parts of the south bar anyone who has advocated for gay marriage from speaking at tech conferences?
The line is right there: Slavery. This is not some slippery slope, and it's not about opinion. It is not an "opinion" to advocate slavery. It is madness. This is not about some group saying "we're all one" and some other group saying "no, the darkies should be enslaved" and it being some difference of opinion or something. This is about humanity versus bestial cruelty and psychotic violence. Gay people aren't doing a…
I see.
It must be super convenient that who should be barred aligns exactly with your morals and sensibilities.
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Condemn what the man says, not the man. He may have some interesting or insightful things to say about other topics like Computer Science. I disagree with everyone on at least one topic... throw them all under the bus because of that?
The logical implication of someone advocating slavery is that they also advocate psychotic violence and cruelty . I do condemn him, indeed, he has condemned himself. There are myriad other people who "may have some interesting or insightful things to say about other topics", yes? Let one of them have his spot. You just don't get to advocate slavery and then walk around and give talks at cons like a person. That is ju…
A complex topic. I see your point, and I even agree... but where do we draw the line where someone's words now wholly condemn the person?
In your final paragraph, replace the word "slavery" with "gay marriage" or "Trump for president". Can I draw the line at people who support these movements and condemn all of them? Or can I draw the line at anyone who has ever shopped at Wal-Mart, and therefore supports Chinese manufacturing, which gives money to a country with horrible human rights violations?
Where do we draw the line? I really dunno. As long as the man has no actual slaves himself, his words do not bother me that much...
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say they have enough integrity to not support a parent organization that has made an odious decision. There's a different between "allowing someone to speak (anywhere, at all)" and "providing them a platform." The parent org has decided to provide a platform, which has consequences. You can disagree about the decisions made, but your "belief system so fragile" is a strawman.
The author has chosen to make a public statement with arguments X Y and Z, everyone else is free to critically evaluate those statements. And yes, fragility I believe is the right word to describe killing a technical conference because he doesn't like another speaker.
A is free to make or not make controversial statements, B is free to provide or not provide a platform for A, C is free to support or not support B.
No ones rights have been abridged, and everyone's freedoms have been preserved.
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say they have enough integrity to not support a parent organization that has made an odious decision. There's a different between "allowing someone to speak (anywhere, at all)" and "providing them a platform." The parent org has decided to provide a platform, which has consequences. You can disagree about the decisions made, but your "belief system so fragile" is a strawman.
The author has chosen to make a public statement with arguments X Y and Z, everyone else is free to critically evaluate those statements. And yes, fragility I believe is the right word to describe killing a technical conference because he doesn't like another speaker.
It reminds me of this quote, which I believe is attributed to GRRM.
“When you cut out a man’s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#79Will we see a similar reaction when anti-white or anti-male speakers are invited to speak at conferences? Or are there groups that it's acceptable to insult and denigrate?
Give me an example of a tech conference speaker who professes the belief that white guys lend themselves well to being enslaved. I certainly can't think of one off the top of my head.
Is it possible this isn't a real problem faced by the software community?
Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
The virtue of tolerance is not very virtuous if you don't have to tolerate anything.
Not tolerating intolerance is very different than "not tolerating anything". Popper argued that it is proper and warranted to refuse to tolerate intolerance, and Rawls noted that a reasonable right to self-preservation supersedes the principle of tolerance.
Everyone advocating for suppressing others always believes they hold the ethical high ground. Sometimes they do. The problem is when they don't, those tools of suppression work just as well.
USSR:
"[We call for] painless but full liquidation of the monasteries, as chief centers of the influence of the churchmen, as nurseries of parasitism, as powerful screws in the exploiting machine of the old ruling classes."
USA:
"We will not knowingly employ a Communist ... In pursuing this policy, we are not going to be swayed by hysteria or intimidation from any source. We are frank to recognize that such a policy involves danger and risks. There is the danger of hurting innocent people. There is the risk of creating an atmosphere of fear. Creative work at its best cannot be carried on in an atmosphere of fear. We will guard against this danger, this risk, this fear."
"... We request Congress to enact legislation to assist American industry to rid itself of subversive, disloyal elements."
China:
"Although the bourgeoisie has been overthrown, it is still trying to use the old ideas, culture, customs, and habits of the exploiting classes to corrupt the masses, capture their minds, and stage a comeback."
"[Our] objective is to struggle against and crush those persons in authority who are taking the capitalist road, to criticize and repudiate the reactionary bourgeois academic “authorities” and the ideology of the bourgeoisie and all other exploiting classes"