The God Emperor Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 'No to Political Correctness - it stifles free speech.' (This is probably my favourite, unbelievable hypocrisy) Isn't political correctness pretty much telling people what they can say? so it does stifle free speech, where's the hypocrisy? 'Teach children positive messages and pride in their country.' (I think it'd be better to tell children the truth and let them decide for themselves ) agree with this one 'Remove the UK from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights.' (No thanks) why do we need a European court of human rights? why not just have our own? 'Make cuts to foreign aid that are real and rigorous.' ( ) Deprived countries that receive foreign aid from us have corrupt and oppressive governments. Giving money to those governments is only going to help keep them in power to the detriment of the man on the street. 'Scrap HS2, all green taxes and wind turbine subsidies.' ( ) We shouldn't be subsidising any energy source. all that's going to do is attract people to wind power due to the easy money available leaving other possibly more reliable renewable energy sources under funded and under developed. 'Proof of private health insurance must be a precondition for immigrants and tourists to enter the UK.' (So no really poor people, I assume that includes asylum seekers?) 'Immigrants must financially support themselves and their dependents for 5 years. This means private health insurance (except emergency medical care), private education and private housing - they should pay into the pot before they take out of it.' (See above) Welfare states and mass immigration don't go well together. This is a step to try and make that work. The NHS is over stretched, there is a shortage of social housing and classroom sizes are ever increasing. Here's the full list of ridiculous issues: http://www.ukip.org/issues
Harry - LCFC Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 Isn't political correctness pretty much telling people what they can say? so it does stifle free speech, where's the hypocrisy? Political correctness is a guideline on what society thinks people ought not to say. It discourages people from expressing unpopular opinions but it doesn't actually prevent an individual from speaking his mind. If you're too scared to say something because you know people will disagree and moan and wave the finger at you that's your problem, your right to speak remains intact.
Mark_w Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 'No to Political Correctness - it stifles free speech.' (This is probably my favourite, unbelievable hypocrisy) Isn't political correctness pretty much telling people what they can say? so it does stifle free speech, where's the hypocrisy? 'Teach children positive messages and pride in their country.' (I think it'd be better to tell children the truth and let them decide for themselves ) agree with this one 'Remove the UK from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights.' (No thanks) why do we need a European court of human rights? why not just have our own? 'Make cuts to foreign aid that are real and rigorous.' ( ) Deprived countries that receive foreign aid from us have corrupt and oppressive governments. Giving money to those governments is only going to help keep them in power to the detriment of the man on the street. 'Scrap HS2, all green taxes and wind turbine subsidies.' ( ) We shouldn't be subsidising any energy source. all that's going to do is attract people to wind power due to the easy money available leaving other possibly more reliable renewable energy sources under funded and under developed. 'Proof of private health insurance must be a precondition for immigrants and tourists to enter the UK.' (So no really poor people, I assume that includes asylum seekers?) 'Immigrants must financially support themselves and their dependents for 5 years. This means private health insurance (except emergency medical care), private education and private housing - they should pay into the pot before they take out of it.' (See above) Welfare states and mass immigration don't go well together. This is a step to try and make that work. The NHS is over stretched, there is a shortage of social housing and classroom sizes are ever increasing. Here's the full list of ridiculous issues: http://www.ukip.org/issues Telling people what they shouldn't be saying and why IS Free Speech. And attempts to stop people from having the freedom to do that actually does stifle free speech. More to the point why pull out of the current European Court of Human Rights? All deprived countries we give aid to have corrupt and oppressive governments? Really? Maybe we should be focusing on doing something about that then. I still have my original reservations about forcing immigrants to get Private Health and Education, at least in cases where those people are legitimately seeking asylum.
Strokes Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 Telling people what they shouldn't be saying and why IS Free Speech. And attempts to stop people from having the freedom to do that actually does stifle free speech. More to the point why pull out of the current European Court of Human Rights? All deprived countries we give aid to have corrupt and oppressive governments? Really? Maybe we should be focusing on doing something about that then. I still have my original reservations about forcing immigrants to get Private Health and Education, at least in cases where those people are legitimately seeking asylum. Removing political correctness, is removing someones authority, not what they can say. So don't be silly.As Ukip main agenda is to pull out of the EU, the European court of human rights would have no authority here anyway. So its not really a suprising policy is it? foreign aid are usually just political bribes and there is very little benifit to the people in poverty. If you want to give your money to these place Farage won't stop you. There won't be asylum seekers coming here under UKIP, so I wouldn't worry about them having no private healthcare insurance.
Mark_w Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 Removing political correctness, is removing someones authority, not what they can say. So don't be silly. What authority?
Strokes Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 What authority?Do you lefties really have that little self awareness?
Monk Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 Farage is such a media whore. Wish he'd get off my tv.
BoneDog Posted 27 March 2014 Posted 27 March 2014 Out of interest what actually is the "gay propaganda" they're teaching in schools? Because all I remember of the mentions of being gay came in PHSE and it was basically "by the way, some men find other men attractive, and likewise for women". Telling kids that gays exist is hardly propaganda. I'll try and find the information I was talking about. Can't remember the specifics but I was definitely furious when I read it. Crushed a grape.
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 Political correctness is a guideline on what society thinks people ought not to say. It discourages people from expressing unpopular opinions but it doesn't actually prevent an individual from speaking his mind. If you're too scared to say something because you know people will disagree and moan and wave the finger at you that's your problem, your right to speak remains intact. that's self censorship, which you are right, fits with free speech. I'm on about people being arrested for committing thought crime on twitter.
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 Telling people what they shouldn't be saying and why IS Free Speech. And attempts to stop people from having the freedom to do that actually does stifle free speech. No, free speech is where in the eyes of the law you are free to say what you want as long as it is not a threat of violence. More to the point why pull out of the current European Court of Human Rights? ​there wouldn't be much point at the moment because the powers that be would draw something very similar up. All deprived countries we give aid to have corrupt and oppressive governments? Really? Maybe we should be focusing on doing something about that then. the majority of them will. you may be able to name a few exceptions but there wouldn't be many. Perhaps we should be doing something about them, like perhaps not funding them with our tax money, would be a start at least. I still have my original reservations about forcing immigrants to get Private Health and Education, at least in cases where those people are legitimately seeking asylum. The nice thing to do would be to give new arrival access to the welfare state, but just because something is doesn't mean it is sustainable.
Mark_w Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 Telling people what they shouldn't be saying and why IS Free Speech. And attempts to stop people from having the freedom to do that actually does stifle free speech. No, free speech is where in the eyes of the law you are free to say what you want as long as it is not a threat of violence. More to the point why pull out of the current European Court of Human Rights? ​there wouldn't be much point at the moment because the powers that be would draw something very similar up. All deprived countries we give aid to have corrupt and oppressive governments? Really? Maybe we should be focusing on doing something about that then. the majority of them will. you may be able to name a few exceptions but there wouldn't be many. Perhaps we should be doing something about them, like perhaps not funding them with our tax money, would be a start at least. I still have my original reservations about forcing immigrants to get Private Health and Education, at least in cases where those people are legitimately seeking asylum. The nice thing to do would be to give new arrival access to the welfare state, but just because something is doesn't mean it is sustainable. So yes it is free speech, it's not the definition of free speech but it does come under free speech as it's not a threat of violence. Correct?
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 So yes it is free speech, it's not the definition of free speech but it does come under free speech as it's not a threat of violence. Correct? you were on about political correctness. saying something that someone could find offensive is not the same as a threat of violence
Mark_w Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 you were on about political correctness. saying something that someone could find offensive is not the same as a threat of violence I know, I think you're missing my point. How would you define political correctness?
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 I know, I think you're missing my point. How would you define political correctness? "The avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against" There's nothing wrong with self censorship, being polite and not saying racial slurs etc. It stifles free speech when the state starts to tell people what they can say on the basis that it could cause offence. with threats of violence you're moving into other territories than free speech.
Mark_w Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 "The avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against" There's nothing wrong with self censorship, being polite and not saying racial slurs etc. It stifles free speech when the state starts to tell people what they can say on the basis that it could cause offence. with threats of violence you're moving into other territories than free speech. Well isn't that what you've just said political correctness is? What the state does is something else entirely, surely? Taking a negative stance towards people who are 'avoiding forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against' (your definition of political correctness) is surely encroaching on their freedom of speech? Sounds pretty hypocritical to me. Taking a stance against discrimination laws already in place would be something else entirely (and I imagine that's what they're actually taking a negative stance towards). I agree that wouldn't be hypocritical, it'd just be stupid. But that's not the same as political correctness.
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 Well isn't that what you've just said political correctness is? What the state does is something else entirely, surely? Taking a negative stance towards people who are 'avoiding forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against' (your definition of political correctness) is surely encroaching on their freedom of speech? Sounds pretty hypocritical to me. Taking a stance against discrimination laws already in place would be something else entirely (and I imagine that's what they're actually taking a negative stance towards). I agree that wouldn't be hypocritical, it'd just be stupid. But that's not the same as political correctness. I'm talking about state enforced political correctness, like the anti discrimination laws. That's what Farage is talking about, he's not trying to ban a attitude of the general public. I probably should have been a bit clearer in my earlier posts
Mark_w Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 I'm talking about state enforced political correctness, like the anti discrimination laws. There's a big difference between political correctness and anti-discrimination.
l444ry Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 If that opportunistic, lightweight nonentity Cameron ever stands by his "commitment" to hold a referendum, It'll be gut wrenching for me to have to side with all the xenophobes in voting to leave the EU. The UKIP stance on the EU stinks of hypocrisy. Farage and his cronies attacks the EU and its institutions at every opportunity, yet its 13 MEPs are/were quite happy to draw their €90k salaries from Brussels along with their generous expenses. And in addition, Farage boasted that he had received around £2m in non-salary expenses and allowances from Brussels since becoming an MEP in 1999. How anyone can hold him up as a man of principle is beyond comprehension.
The God Emperor Posted 28 March 2014 Posted 28 March 2014 There's a big difference between political correctness and anti-discrimination. I always thought they were one of the same. seems I was wrong and have wasted my time
Voll Blau Posted 2 April 2014 Posted 2 April 2014 Drinking with Germans, French and Swiss in Manchester yesterday. The (rather attractive) Swiss girl I was chatting to said she wanted them to join the EU. Surprised me a bit, assumed everyone in Switzerland was anti-EU.
Strokes Posted 2 April 2014 Posted 2 April 2014 Ding ding round two. Can Clegg keep side-shifting out of trouble?
purpleronnie Posted 2 April 2014 Posted 2 April 2014 Say what you see Ronnie Can't argue with that. Farage is very good in debates, amazed Clegg agreed to it TBH, even though I agree with clegg more than farage, to me it's a reckless decision from the lib dem leader.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.