Human rights and Vivaldi
-
@escorpiom Night-night. See you in about nine hours.
-
@Ayespy
I hope you have a goodnight sleep, I'm going to do the same, but wanted to address your last post and highlight some things.
While it is true that I've never lived in the US (consider it a failed state and hate capitalism) I do recognize that racism is an issue there.
I'm from Europe and we've had something similar in the 60's when our country needed labor, importing Turks and North Africans on an industrial scale.
I was just a boy back then (yes, I'm that old also) but have seen and lived the issues that arise from the failure to understand people from different cultures and races.
Anyway, since then I've traveled a lot and when you've been to other places you become a bit "mixed" yourself so maybe that's why I see racism in another perspective.Your post does however show what the other poster said before: What happens in the USA happens in the world.
Now we are seeing riots in London, in Paris, demonstrations in Amsterdam and surely you can add other cities to the list.
That's what I mean with "reasonable proportion", people sometimes don't even know what they are rioting about. Racial issues in the US don't necessarily reflect racial issues in France, GB or Holland, so it becomes something more universal like "human rights", and then you can use that pretext to burn down your local police station.
That's also my problem with Vivaldi posting these kind of pictures, you are giving people a pretext to escalate the whole thing.If you guys really want to push this human rights thing, and lets say I'll get along with that, I've got one simple request:
Can we also acknowledge and explore the role the jews held in the global slave trade?
Most of what happens today has it's roots in the slave trade, and I'm curious if the anti-semite label get's thrown around when we touch this topic.Cheers all.
-
@escorpiom , I understand what you are saying, but I already said in the other thread, it is not about being with Those who violently attack police stations or businesses, but it is a question of no one being discriminated, killed or mistreated just because of the color of their skin.Just yesterday, another Afro American was shot to death for resisting arrest. More than a thousand unarmed Afro Americans are already assassinated by the American police. Also in other countries There are attacks and discrimination due to racism.
I invite you to read the MLK (also killed by an racist) article on Wikipedia and his "I had a dream" speech to understand what this matter is about, a peaceful coexistence on equal terms, independent of skin color. Nothing to do with fomenting violent demonstrations, which we all condemn. If you consider the desire for a peaceful and egalitarian coexistence as something manipulative or political partiality, you are simply wrong and you misinterpreted the statement that Vivaldi may have with all the reason in the world, also as a company with users in the whole world. -
@escorpiom said in Human rights and Vivaldi:
I'm curious if the anti-semite label get's thrown around when we touch this topic
This will come in the form of an account suspension, as per the CoC.
If you have any specific and targeted examples of people who engaged in slavery that you want to discuss (who may or may not be jewish), I won't stop you.
But do not make blanket statements which imply the entire jewish faith is somehow at fault. That is antisemtic.
-
I just want to say that since I'm tired with every single company has been writing essays about BLM on their social media, seeing that the most Vivaldi did in that matter was a no context thumbnail referencing MLK, it's really not that bad. As long as Vivaldi doesn't start to loudly preach about BLM like every other company, I'm fine with it. That thumbnail is enough to show where Vivaldi stands without lecturing everyone about it.
-
Regarding Human rights & Vivaldi, the image with MLK references current events. We are against racial injustice. We are concerned about the safety of people at this time. Please stay safe!
-
@Gaëlle , this is how this article must be understood, any other interpretation is absurd. MLK only remember the human rights, not more.
-
Ok as things stand now, I'm going to get banned anyway (for having a different opinion) so this will be my last post on the subject.
I already got caught up way to deep in this argument so it's time to leave it alone.Just want to make clear that it was never my intention to offend anyone and if I somehow broke the CoC with my rant, then I'm sorry for that.
It really looks like life has become a one way street and everybody has to conform to certain socially accepted ideas.
I'm simply not like that and will never conform to whatever society or social media dictates. No BLM, no LGBTQI.Cheers all.
-
@escorpiom Opinions don't get anyone banned. Attacks on racial, ethnic, religious groups do get persons banned. If you were going to be banned for something you have written, it already would have happened
-
@escorpiom , everyone is free to present his opinion for debate, as is normal with respect to free speech. But in a debate you also have to accept that your opinion may be wrong, if the evidence and arguments so indicate. Being wrong, no one is banned in this forum, this only happens in the cases, subject to the rules of conduct: treat others with respect, as simple as this.
-
@Ayespy So you believe in absolutes, regardless of majority opinion, or culture. I believe this, too. However, who gets to decide good and evil? There's no supreme deity dictating it. It is left to man. If not the majority, then who? While I enjoy these arguments from time to time, I don't think a channel moderator should be this involved in such discussions.
-
@kgwelch Right and wrong, good and bad, are actually influenced by local opinion and culture - in that, if an act has no inherent impact on survival, it is wrong to do it if it upsets people, and right to do it if it makes them feel safe, secure, calm or glad.
Wearing a beard or not has no intrinsic value - but it may sit well with some cultures and not with others. When in Kazakhstan, do as the Kazakhs do. That's good manners, and that's good. It's good not because the rules say so, but because it improves the well-being of others with whom you have to interact. Calling someone "old man" in one culture may be derisive, and a mark of respect in another culture. Use good manners. That's good. Don't eat with your left hand among Muslims or in India or Africa/Egypt. That would upset people and be bad, though it has no intrinsic effect on the universe at large
Poisoning the ocean, even if popular or a scriptural mandate in a particular culture, is bad. It is destructive to the survival potential of the planet. For acts that have intrinsic value, it is mores, not acts, which must change, when mandated acts are destructive.
-
@JohnConnorBear You would be OK with my expressing my opinion if I didn't wear the "Moderator" badge? I'm sure that what I say concerning good and evil, right and wrong, is objective reality (not a moral code or some holy dictate), but in the context of online forums it is, of course, my opinion and unenforceable and therefore irrelevant to my moderator status. Your last sentence strikes me as off-topic, and inapt. I don't understand why you made it unless you are just chafing under the fact that the forums are moderated - for which, sorry/not sorry. Remember, mods in these forums are just common users who volunteered to help and whom the community admins felt they could trust not to make things worse. We're the neighborhood watch, not the cops.
-
@JohnConnorBear , opinions are always debatable, because certainly there is no absolute truth and each one has his own particular way of seeing the world, stemming from his experiences, education and the environment. Good and evil are not always clearly definable either, but between this and certain events there is a clear difference.If someone kills another person, simply for the color of their skin or for being homosexual, for no other reason than this, it is not just simple opinions that we can see in a neutral way saying that this just as respectable as someone who cares about the person as such and not their color or sexual condition. It is clear that in all groups there are psychopaths and racists, but for this reason, this cannot be transferred to the entire group, and the just thing is then to simply debug personal responsibilities.
-
@JohnConnorBear So definitions are the sticking point. You define Good and Evil using the bible, and I define them using an ordinary dictionary. My definitions have no religious point of reference.
-
@JohnConnorBear , understand me well, of course a murderer is always a murderer, but this has nothing to do with what I have said, but I am talking about people who kill themselves for mere raxist and homophobic reasons, no matter if they are a person of color who kills a white person or vice versa, these are discriminatory reasons. If it goes over in a group that must ensure the safety of citizens, the thing acquires an even more condemnable tint. If it is a whole state, things like the holocaust happen in Germany, where everyone was killed for being 'different', for racist reasons, homophobes or simply for having a different opinion than the 'official' one, admittedly supported, since you mention it for the clergy, who should precisely watch over Christian morality (which they themselves have never done).
In the United States the KKK still has quite a few influences in many official spheres and this has to end, precisely because of a minimum of ethics and, if you want, Christian morality. -
@JohnConnorBear "The very principle of "human rights" is that every person, being "human", must be treated like anybody else in the same context and that treatment is "the right way to do things", then it is "moral"."
Exactly this, but precisely for this reason, one cannot be neutral when committing atrocities because some think that human rights are only for whites and heterosexuals, which is obviously a wrong and also dangerous position, as it could be seen in Nazi Germany and the treatment they received that they were not considered to be pure Aryan, homosexual, diminished, for not being in agreement with the Führer, etc.
Neither moral nor ethical is simply false and a crime against humanity. This is why it is important not to be 'neutral' in these things, because we know from history how it begins, but never how it can end and the United States is on a very dangerous path. -
@JohnConnorBear Religion, by all means, has deeply influenced our language. But it cannot be allowed to blind us to what acts tend toward preserving life on the planet and what acts tend toward ending it. As that is my view, I hew toward the definitions of words that reflect existence rather than feelings and opinions and dogma about existence.
A food is "good" if it nourishes and does not harm you - not because a religious tradition defined it as "good."
The inability to differentiate reality from opinion is one of the primary failings of human thinking.
-
@JohnConnorBear You approve then, of humanity actively extincting species wholesale, including, potentially, humans? Like you don't think it might be a good idea to avoid killing off the bee population so that we may continue to grow food?
You introduce and extend meanings and implications into my statements that have no bearing whatever on my actual thinking - lecturing me about some fiction like an "eternal present," etc. You apparently imagine me to be quite stupid and short-sighted because I strip the complexity out of ideas or something.
You know what makes people stupid? Complexity. In my professional life, folks commonly refer to me as a "genius" (no, that's not made-up. They really do) only because I see to the heart of things and can simplify ideas that they cannot otherwise understand.
Again, you harp on the supposed futility of human decision-making. It must be a very hopeless world you live in - nothing can be done about anything, so there's no point in trying to understand and do "right." I choose to approach life differently.
-
@JohnConnorBear You are stuck on a term which you are misinterpreting. This "preserving."
Do you understand the concept of survival? You just used it yourself, for instance, "survival of the fittest" (a corruption by Spencer of Darwin's theories in Origin of Species).
Assuming you said "yes," you understand survival, then tell me what role you believe that concept has in the human drama. Where does it rank in the hierarchy of values?