How Democracy Dies

[Duque de Bragança]

Freedom of speech means nothing if it is limited to your living room.  Or I was told a prominent leftist of this forum.

La critique du gauchisme du salon par un gauchiste de salon ? 

[Malthus]

But people coming out of law school, practicing in a business and not knowing the basics of the law as it applies to construction projects, that I have seen. 

To be fair, law school is unlikely to teach a student anything much about construction law. It's a pretty specialized field (all that stuff about liens and trusts for subcontractors - not my area), and law school isn't really intended to teach students the entirely of the law = more like the tools they need to learn these areas on the job. That's why, in Canada at least, law students are expected to undertake a year's apprenticeship ("articling") in the workforce under lawyers wo are supposed to know their stuff before they are licenced ... so the real problem here is not that the school didn't teach them, but that despite their apprenticeship, they didn't learn (or were set to some menial tasks rather than being taught). 

[Razgovory]

Oh, and one more thing:  it's hard to find a phrase more Orwellian than "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences".  That's the justification used for why it's okay for people to be fired for saying dumb things in their personal life. 

If freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, then what the fuck does it actually mean?  Freedom from having your vocal cords severed?  The whole point of having freedom of speech is to not discourage people to voice things that may not be popular, and that doesn't end at First Amendment.  First Amendment is just a US government recognition of the concept, but the concept is universally applicable.

Frankly, I find people wishing for people to be fired and celebrating when it inevitably happens to be very scary.  The people in history who have the most innocent blood on their hands have usually being authoritarians who believed themselves to be righteous in their violence.

Freedom from having the state restrict speech.

Freedom of speech means nothing if it is limited to your living room.  Or I was told a prominent leftist of this forum.

I think we were talking about freedom of religion in that case and it concerned state action against a private citizen.

[crazy canuck]

Have you quit your job then or are you going to continue being a thief?

Of course not. With my considerable ill-gotten gains, I run a weekly course on how to undermine all of the United States institutions through the use of gender-inclusive vocabulary. Next week, we begin with throwing Discipline and Punish at the Constitution.

[viper37]

(or were set to some menial tasks rather than being taught). 

you mean they went to them to ask for copies?  No way! 

[viper37]

I think we were talking about freedom of religion in that case and it concerned state action against a private citizen.

Did Quebec start shutting down/burning down churches? Mosques? Temples? Spiritual sanctuaries?
Ah I forgot.  Somewhere, someone started asking that human sacrifices had to be forbidden and animal sacrifices had to be done in a "humane way", similar to how a slaughterhouse operates?  Actually, the first part has been true for a while now, but I can't remember where.  I guess in the US, human sacrifices are ok, so long as they are practiced with a semi-automatic weapon?   FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!

[viper37]

Oex is arguing, correctly, that "Ivory Tower" intellectualism is criticized precisely because it is not concerned with practical outcomes to practical concerns.  Activism is the opposite of that unconcern.

in any business, legit or not, you have muscle and you have brains.  It does not mean that one is cleaner than the other, they just do things differently.

[dps]

I guess in the US, human sacrifices are ok, so long as they are practiced with a semi-automatic weapon?   FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!

Nah, you're allowed to use revolvers, too.

[viper37]

I guess in the US, human sacrifices are ok, so long as they are practiced with a semi-automatic weapon?   FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!

Nah, you're allowed to use revolvers, too.

it's good to see that at least some traditions do survive in the US

[Sheilbh]

Activists =/= Ivory Tower. The two are mutually exclusive.

whatever.  people from the likes of social sciences at UQAM.  People who don't work and don't have to study to get a pass, so when they don't plan rebellions or vandalize stores, they send threatening letters to people who don't use a totally new gender neutral pronouns or get them fired from their jobs.

As demonstrated by the latest crisis we suffered over here, these people have at least lots of sympathizers in the teaching and political corps.

Oex is arguing, correctly, that "Ivory Tower" intellectualism is criticized precisely because it is not concerned with practical outcomes to practical concerns.  Activism is the opposite of that unconcern.

Agree. Also I think academia in the humanities (or at least in English Lit which is the corner I know) descriptive or at best predictive. It's not active or setting up a goal for how the world should be. It may be different with philosophy or politics etc.

Also with truth and Trump I often think about football. I think people are engaging with politics (and other bits of reality) as fans and I think football's a little bit ahead of where we're going.

A couple of football examples I've seen in the last year and found really striking.

Man City won the league playing amazing football that was universally praised, but Liverpool ran them very close. City got 98 points; Liverpool got 97. Whenever any journalist posted a piece about City, underneath it there would be thousands of messages from people all over the world losing their shit over the biased coverage. Now I think there is a bit of a pro-Liverpool bias in the English media (but, then, I'm an Everton fan) but to the extent there's bias I think it's for a title race and an exciting competition because that makes being a football journalist a lot easier. But they weren't recording City's season in the way that fans experience it, which, I think, was the issue for the fans - especially because they now have other sources of coverage, there's always been zines but there's now fan TV, fan podcasts, plus loads of club-produced content. I don't think it'll be long before clubs get rid of dealing with the media entirely and just deliver their message through club and fan media.

The other side of the City story is they're owned by Abu Dhabi to sportswash that regime. I've only noticed this in the last few years but articles about Abu Dhabi and, say, their human rights record get loads of comments from Man City fans about how it's other examples of the media attacking their club. I understand the same happens with PSG and Qatar and I'm sure there are other examples. But this seems new, that being a fan is beyond your support for the football team and is actually demonstrated (and performed for the other fans in the comments) for the ownership structure of your club. It's odd.

That feels like the direction we're in and it's all about identity. Fans' identity is linked to the product they consume or team they support and it might not be a million miles away from politics of class identity, it's just more individual and volatile. But I'm not sure.

[viper37]

Let me guess: You were litterally unable to access Languish for the last 2 years?

[Razgovory]

I think we were talking about freedom of religion in that case and it concerned state action against a private citizen.

Did Quebec start shutting down/burning down churches? Mosques? Temples? Spiritual sanctuaries?
Ah I forgot.  Somewhere, someone started asking that human sacrifices had to be forbidden and animal sacrifices had to be done in a "humane way", similar to how a slaughterhouse operates?  Actually, the first part has been true for a while now, but I can't remember where.  I guess in the US, human sacrifices are ok, so long as they are practiced with a semi-automatic weapon?   FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!

Turn down the stupid a few notches, okay?

[viper37]

I think we were talking about freedom of religion in that case and it concerned state action against a private citizen.

Did Quebec start shutting down/burning down churches? Mosques? Temples? Spiritual sanctuaries?
Ah I forgot.  Somewhere, someone started asking that human sacrifices had to be forbidden and animal sacrifices had to be done in a "humane way", similar to how a slaughterhouse operates?  Actually, the first part has been true for a while now, but I can't remember where.  I guess in the US, human sacrifices are ok, so long as they are practiced with a semi-automatic weapon?   FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!!!

Turn down the stupid a few notches, okay?

it seems to be the only thing you understand.

[Razgovory]

Well, it ain't working because you aren't making any sense.  I know you have a contempt of religion and more than willing deprive them of rights if they don't conform to your culture.  I have a contempt for Nationalism and thus have little interest in allowing people to be persecuted for failure to conform and a willingness to destroy Nationalist movements as was done between 1939-1945.  So you see, we are starting at two very different positions.  I don't think we can come to a sort middle ground here.  I know, I know, it's very Anglo-Saxon of me not to want to persecute people for their language, race, or religion, but I guess I was just raised wrong.  Quite frankly, I don't really care what you have say anymore, anymore than I would care about what the AfD or the FPO has to say.

[FunkMonk]

Hi Sheilbh. Good to see you post again