Politics: J'accuse!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
But look -- you just did!

It's a stupid thing to say, but that didn't stop you. Tell me, how did you perform this cost-benefit analysis? And what's the baseline?

She's using a shorthand, unfortunately. It's not so much that we're not allowed to say something, but that speaking bad about A is acceptable, while speaking bad about B is not acceptable.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Nope. PC comes from all sides. Different subjects at times, but same basic driver.

I don't think I disagree with your expanation of that phenomenom, but I don't think that's quite what most people mean when they use the term "PC".

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Second, the way bilmore described PC a few posts ago, it just sounds like a shorthand that lefties use to dismiss substantive points of view that they have previously considered and rejected. If so -- and I'm not sure this does justice to the way the term is used -- but if so, is anyone really going to pretend that conservatives don't do the same thing?

That isn't how I read his post. Even if you are right about conservatives, so what? How does that change anything?

Why do you try to turn everything into a liberal vs. conservative argument?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
That isn't how I read his post. Even if you are right about conservatives, so what? How does that change anything?

Why do you try to turn everything into a liberal vs. conservative argument?

(1) STP. He's already agreed with me.

(2) Listen you dope, I was saying that liberals and conservatives do the same thing.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
But look -- you just did!

I am anonymous here. I would not say that if I weren't anonymous.

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
It's a stupid thing to say, but that didn't stop you. Tell me, how did you perform this cost-benefit analysis? And what's the baseline?

Why is it a stupid thing to say? Here is how to perform the cost-benefit analysis. Take a look at the middle east. See how women there are forced to live. It sucks and it is islamic beliefs that force that life on them. It is a life of inferiority and male domination and control and even being stoned to death. Even in the more moderate muslim sects, women are still not considered the equal of men.

Then compare that to say the impact of the Methodist church on the world.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop


(2) Listen you dope, I was saying that liberals and conservatives do the same thing.

I don't think the concern in the academy was about the two conservative professors stiffling liberal viewpoints.

Except maybe at Bob Jones. But they don't count because they're a bunch of crazy christian zealots.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
(2) Listen you dope, I was saying that liberals and conservatives do the same thing.

I understand that is what you are saying, but you are trying to turn a discussion about PC into a liberal vs. conservative debate by doing that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Why is it a stupid thing to say? Here is how to perform the cost-benefit analysis. Take a look at the middle east. See how women there are forced to live. It sucks and it is islamic beliefs that force that life on them. It is a life of inferiority and male domination and control and even being stoned to death. Even in the more moderate muslim sects, women are still not considered the equal of men.

You forgot the benefit part, and you forgot to control for other causes. I think you're going to need a bigger computer to run these numbers.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
I understand that is what you are saying, but you are trying to turn a discussion about PC into a liberal vs. conservative debate by doing that.

Bilmore said it first, and I don't think either he or I wanted to do that. But thanks for your concern. I'm sure no wants a discussion of PC that turns into a liberal vs. conservative debate.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I don't think the concern in the academy was about the two conservative professors stiffling liberal viewpoints.

Except maybe at Bob Jones. But they don't count because they're a bunch of crazy christian zealots.

Everybody seems to use the term differently. You seem to think it's an academic thing. I usually can't figure out what people mean when they talk about PC, except that they disapprove of other people who do not want to explain in detail why they disagree with you and instead do it concisely.

[size=1.1]eta: hat trick![/size]

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
You forgot the benefit part, and you forgot to control for other causes. I think you're going to need a bigger computer to run these numbers.

You know, Ty, I'm as much for virgins in heaven as anyone, but it seems your other causes points the finger in a more dangerous direction. If Islam is the result, rather than the cause, it suggests a genetic, rather than cultural-religious, reason for the subjugation of women.

That said, it's hard to find a religion that does not have an extremist fringe that gives the more innocuous parts of the religion a bad name.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You know, Ty, I'm as much for virgins in heaven as anyone, but it seems your other causes points the finger in a more dangerous direction. If Islam is the result, rather than the cause, it suggests a genetic, rather than cultural-religious, reason for the subjugation of women.

That said, it's hard to find a religion that does not have an extremist fringe that gives the more innocuous parts of the religion a bad name.

Two words: surrendered wives.

ETA I would prefer if you would use the phrase "extremest edge" or something. I think this is narcissism or something like that, not PC-ism.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
If Islam is the result, rather than the cause, it suggests a genetic, rather than cultural-religious, reason for the subjugation of women.

Karl Marx would have a thing or two to say about this. I think we can come up with something besides religion and genes. Culture? Economics? Environment? Flouridation? Home schooling? Tax policy?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Karl Marx would have a thing or two to say about this. I think we can come up with something besides religion and genes. Culture? Economics? Environment? Flouridation? Home schooling? Tax policy?

Just wanted to add, Happy Lenin's Birthday!

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Everybody seems to use the term differently. You seem to think it's an academic thing. I usually can't figure out what people mean when they talk about PC, except that they disapprove of other people who do not want to explain in detail why they disagree with you and instead do it concisely.

[size=1.1]eta: hat trick![/size]

Mission creep. The term as I know it originated in tendency of certain people, mostly of the far left persuasion, who sought to stifle or limit the scope of discussion of some topics relating to historically discriminated-against people, while simultaneously using certain terminology to measure the loyalty of others to that cause.* The term may well have transmogrefied into a synonym for "unthinking liberal," but that's not how I see it, and represents a reduction from the true perniciousness of the original debate-stifling strategy.

* To wit (footnotes are allowed on the PB right), much discussion of race, as in racial disparities in SAT scores, for example, could not be had because to do so was assumed necessarily and offensively to require mention of hte possibility that something other than institutional racism was the sole explanation.