The slow death of free speech

[Jacob]

At least I'm not one of "those" either, that is sanctimonious pricks who use borderline-bigoted language to make a stupid point about how what they wrongly perceive as bigotry is bad.

You caught the irony, I see.

Yeah, it'd be a real dick move if someone aggressively shut down a conversation by enforcing a rigid taxonomy of cultural traits with their loaded vocabulary and blanket condemnation, wouldn't it?  Good thing I didn't do that.

You didn't shut down the conversation, that's true. As for the rest, that's what you embraced with this:

I agree with the article.

Also I really hate multiculturalism.  Some cultures are different and equal.  Some are different and better.  Some are different and much, much worse.  And we can't have any evolution toward the ideal human culture if debate on which is which is silenced.

"My culture (and the previous legal regime under which I lived) permit husbands to beat their wives."
"Your culture, despite some better qualities, sucks."

How about "wife-beating sucks, and your culture is no excuse"? That has the advantage of not implying that the members of that culture who do not beat their wives, who think it is wrong that their husbands beat them, and/or otherwise disagree with the statement are not somehow failing to uphold the cultural values that the wife-beater posits as objectively true (and you implictly embrace in your desire to oppose wife-beating). Why not keep the battle in the realm of personal abuse rather than accept turning it into a culture vs culture battle?

It's not terribly nuanced, but it's neither prejudice nor bigotry nor establishing a "blah blah blah hierarchy" to make myself "feel better."  Guess as a white trash Southerner, just absolutely mired in a legacy of slavery and poverty, I'm just not as bright as a ball of light (and snideness).

Well, it actually is "blah blah blah hierarchy", as you so eloquently summarize my point. I have not, you may wish to note, directed the terms prejudice or bigotry against you in my snide ball-of-lightness.

It's kind of funny how you think it's perfectly fine to define cultures by whatever traits you think are appropriate (culture X = wife-beating) and then objectively rank them (culture X sucks because = wife-beating; ignoring apparently all other facets of the culture), yet you get upset when someone does that to you. For the record, I do not actually hold you as an exemplar of Southern white trash culture; that was a rhetorical device. Also, for the record, if I were to describe the culture of my family - both immediate and extended - the only term that is remotely accurate is 'multi-cultural', so when you said you hate multiculturalism you made it pretty personal from the get-go.

[Jacob]

Brain, as a Swede, do you know any slurs for Danes?  I feel like I don't even have a knife for Jacob's gunfight.

You drew your knife first; don't get all upset when I shank you in the kidney.

[Jacob]

To Swedes other Scandinavians kind of fly under the radar. Swedes don't care about the opinion of Danes or Norwegians. The classic on Danes is the hospital roof scene from Lars von Trier's Riget, but I'm not sure how well it travels. Bottom line is there's no real good nasty slur, sorry.

Yeah, it'd all be in the tone of voice and context. "Swede" is slur enough, when it comes down to it. I expect it's the same going the other way.

[Ideologue]

If a someone thinks that (to continue with our example) spousal abuse is cool, then no matter what good qualities they have (perhaps they are kind to animals), they've committed to evil.  If a sizeable majority within a (somewhat arbitrarily defined group) thinks that spousal abuse is cool, then that group should be addressed.  Not because it's not valuable to address the evil of the belief, but because the culture itself supports it through its norms.  If that hardens the hearts of some moderates within the in-group, that's more of a tactical problem than a moral one (and if they can be swayed by group feeling like that, maybe they don't deserve a great deal of consideration in the first place).

It's kind of funny how you think it's perfectly fine to define cultures by whatever traits you think are appropriate (culture X = wife-beating) and then objectively rank them (culture X sucks because = wife-beating; ignoring apparently all other facets of the culture), yet you get upset when someone does that to you.

That's not the same thing.  It'd be a lot more the same thing if I were talking to a Saudi national and said he didn't understand my point because he's a terrorist.  But I don't use such offensive language as a "rhetorical device" and neither, ordinarily, would you.

It was never my intent to personally insult you, and I think you know I have no problem with your multicultural family, and as a once and future (well, I hope not ) practicing miscegenationist myself, I think you also know dating and procreating outside your culture isn't what I meant.

I have a problem with legal regimes and the cultural currents that support them that stand in the way of progress to a single melted-up and morally correct culture on this planet; as noted, cultural enemies of progress include my own.  I'm not certain we disagree on this; you just don't like my framework, I think because it's too aggressive (nor do I like yours, because it can be too accommodating).

For the record, I do not actually hold you as an exemplar of Southern white trash culture

The tab open next to this one is a Paul Krugman column.  In other words, I had guessed.

[The Brain]

Cultures are only as valuable as the way they make people act. If we have to burn a rich tapestry to ensure that people don't get abused then so be it.

[Razgovory]

I like pissy Jake much better when's he not pissy at me.  As a note I broadly agree with him, here.

[Ideologue]

Jake knows I love him forever and always, but I don't like it when the left eats itself, though it does seem to be our most salient cultural trait.

[garbon]

If a someone thinks that (to continue with our example) spousal abuse is cool, then no matter what good qualities they have (perhaps they are kind to animals), they've committed to evil.  If a sizeable majority within a (somewhat arbitrarily defined group) thinks that spousal abuse is cool, then that group should be addressed.  Not because it's not valuable to address the evil of the belief, but because the culture itself supports it through its norms.  If that hardens the hearts of some moderates within the in-group, that's more of a tactical problem than a moral one (and if they can be swayed by group feeling like that, maybe they don't deserve a great deal of consideration in the first place).

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

[Valmy]

Only 1 in 6?  The school to prison pipeline clearly has a few kinks.

[derspiess]

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

Does either culture encourage such activity?

[garbon]

Only 1 in 6?  The school to prison pipeline clearly has a few kinks.

They noted (at whatever time they made factsheet - their site doesn't say) that if the trend continues, one in 3 black males born today will spend some time in prison.

Black women are at 1 in 100.

[garbon]

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

Does either culture encourage such activity?

I'm not sure how to answer that question. I suppose not more so than "American" culture encourages white collar crime?

At the same time there are certainly elements that encourage lives of crime / unprotected sex with multiple partners.

[Razgovory]

If a someone thinks that (to continue with our example) spousal abuse is cool, then no matter what good qualities they have (perhaps they are kind to animals), they've committed to evil.  If a sizeable majority within a (somewhat arbitrarily defined group) thinks that spousal abuse is cool, then that group should be addressed.  Not because it's not valuable to address the evil of the belief, but because the culture itself supports it through its norms.  If that hardens the hearts of some moderates within the in-group, that's more of a tactical problem than a moral one (and if they can be swayed by group feeling like that, maybe they don't deserve a great deal of consideration in the first place).

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

Woah, seriously about the HIV?

[garbon]

If a someone thinks that (to continue with our example) spousal abuse is cool, then no matter what good qualities they have (perhaps they are kind to animals), they've committed to evil.  If a sizeable majority within a (somewhat arbitrarily defined group) thinks that spousal abuse is cool, then that group should be addressed.  Not because it's not valuable to address the evil of the belief, but because the culture itself supports it through its norms.  If that hardens the hearts of some moderates within the in-group, that's more of a tactical problem than a moral one (and if they can be swayed by group feeling like that, maybe they don't deserve a great deal of consideration in the first place).

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

Woah, seriously about the HIV?

As of this 2010 Time article.

http://healthland.time.com/2010/09/26/study-20-of-homosexual-men-are-hiv-positive-but-only-half-know-it/

[derspiess]

So soon we'll have the black culture sucks as they are criminals (NAACP notes one in 6 black men have spent time in prison)...or gay culture sucks because they are HIV ridden (CDC notes 1 in 5 gay men have HIV...and half that number don't even know it).

Does either culture encourage such activity?

I'm not sure how to answer that question. I suppose not more so than "American" culture encourages white collar crime?

At the same time there are certainly elements that encourage lives of crime / unprotected sex with multiple partners.

You could have just said no.

edit: didn't intend the double meaning