Home Inmate Central

Inmate Central, where civil and family-friendly discourse about off-audio topics (other than religion and politics) is welcome.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Inmate Central ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: thing is...

There is a William F. Buckley Jr. line for every occasion, and the one for you is: "I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said."

A sizeable portion of the Columbia protesters is obviously antisemitic, and attempts to deny that obvious truth amounts to the sort of intellectual dishonesty that would have impressed Goebbels. Gaslighting in defense of bigotry does not become you, Mr. Pearce.

Which brings me back to the hypocrisy I referred to in my previous post. Until 15 minutes ago, the standard for "hate speech" was purely subjective. The intent of the speaker was a secondary consideration to the feelings of the aggrieved party. If someone felt "hurt" or "triggered" by a statement, that was enough to declare the statement offensive. That's why places like Columbia have spent so much time and effort devising speech codes and replacement euphemisms for offensive words. Nor is this orgy of euphemisms limited to the Academy. A few years ago, a realtor friend informed me that "master bedroom" was considered a no-no because of its slavery connotation. Recently, President Biden took a lot of heat for using the word "illegal" to describe a person who was here illegally. I could furnish more examples but you get the point.

However, vile and intentionally hurtful language directed at Jews is now considered fair or defensible comment on free speech grounds. And I think the free speech argument has merit. But you can't wrap yourself in the First Amendment if in the past you defended linguistic chicanery and bureaucratic/journalistic enforcement of newspeak on the grounds that the the ear/eye of the offended is what determines hate speech or offensive language. If it's in poor taste for Stereophile to use "blind test," then holding a sign saying that Jewish Columbia students are Hamas' "next target" for rape and murder has to qualify as harmful speech. You can retreat to the claim that anti-Zionist speech isn't the same as antisemitic speech, and occasionally that's true, but not when any Jew on campus who doesn't join the mob is branded a Zionist. And not when the moral standard is supposed to be the feelings of the target of the speech.

When you praise Hamas, and chant "Never forget the 7th of October," and, "That will happen not one more time, not 10 more times, but 10,000 times!" you are more than an antisemite, you are an open supporter of terrorism.

Lustily declaring, in chant form or otherwise, that Israel must be Judenrein by any means necessary, is an open call for war, not peace.






This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Michael Percy Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]