The Death of the Author and the End of Empathy - Literature can now only be read through a victim's lens

[JM_]

5 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Like Canada’s Bill C-16?

it doesn't limit speech, it just says you can't discriminate on the additional basis of gender identity along with the other things that were in the law. Is that really a bad thing? 

[189lb enforcers?]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

well thats quite the twist 

 

the equivalence is censorship imo. Trump wants to censor any opposition, and people who tweet horrible things like that English prof want to censor anyone that doesn't agree with her too.

 

I don't believe that there are anywhere near as many people on the "left" that would agree with her as those on the "right" that can find a way to support Trump but thats just my opinion, can't back that up with a stat. 

 

 

@189lb enforcers? And what actually is a Trump Supporter? 

A Conservative; a bad person with no feelings, or brains. 

 

It someone that voted for Trump, what else would it be? I do think you have to be willfully ignorant, or simply just don't care, about his lies and crappy things he does to still support him so put that in whatever box fits, but there doesn't seem to be any line of decency that can be crossed that his conservative base cares about. 

 

I like the idea of tightening up borders. 

Thus, I’m a trump supporter; a racist, sexist, bigoted... it goes on. 

This is is my point about branding. 

 

I support certain conservative ideals, not the talking head politician. If I don’t care for Trump, the man, I am still a Trump supporter though. 

 

The Left, which is pretty much the MSM, Hollywood and the education systems, remind us every day that Trump is bad, and Trump is the face of Conservatism. By proxy, all conservatives are bad, or so it would seem. 

 

I don't make these stupid memes, I just post them. Sometimes they fit, sometimes almost. Whatever, I just try to offer free laughs where possible. 

 

 

 

[Lancaster]

9 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Hmm..sounds remarkably close to Winston Smith's daily task in 1984.

 

This PC-libt*rd culture/lingo is so tiresome. I'd imagine if one can't be bothered keeping up, trouble will result, sooner or later.

Makes you wonder whether those perpetually offended have ever read 1984.... or are using 1984 as a template to change society.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I like the idea of tightening up borders. 

Thus, I’m a trump supporter; a racist, sexist, bigoted... it goes on. 

This is is my point about branding. 

 

I support certain conservative ideals, not the talking head politician. If I don’t care for Trump, the man, I am still a Trump supporter though. 

 

The Left, which is pretty much the MSM, Hollywood and the education systems, remind us every day that Trump is bad, and Trump is the face of Conservatism. By proxy, all conservatives are bad, or so it would seem. 

 

I don't make these stupid memes, I just post them. Sometimes they fit, sometimes almost. Whatever, I just try to offer free laughs where possible. 

 

 

 

 

OK but we can have a discussion on border issues and try to find some kind of consensus like reasonable people most of the time.

 

But sometimes things like separating families as a deterrent (and it turns out it might be permanent for some kids since they didn't keep proper records) is simply wrong, and you have to stop supporting the man even though he represents conservative ideas for the moment. 

 

Calling that out on CNN or wherever on the msm seems like the least that can be done. 

 

 

 

 

[Nuxfanabroad]

21 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

Makes you wonder whether those perpetually offended have ever read 1984.... or are using 1984 as a template to change society.

My own theory is a little darker/more sinister..figure the players at the pyramid-summit want us unwashed masses divided & conquered. Society driven to distraction(ADD'ers on Iphones) when the house of cards comes down.

 

Probably a united lower class seems scary for the elite.

 

As a proud tech-dinosaur in a foreign land, western culture looks very strange(& ugly) to me now. I have no desire to return.

[xereau]

10 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Hot take. Political correctness is the road to fascism.

ANTIFA is akin to Mao's red guards.  Dangerous crack heads, being wound up by professors funded by several of the biggest foundations.

 

Check out Professor Dr. Darrell Hamamoto.  He attended then exposed several Rockefeller Foundation funded student radicalization workshops a few years ago.

[xereau]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

OK but we can have a discussion on border issues and try to find some kind of consensus like reasonable people most of the time.

 

But sometimes things like separating families as a deterrent (and it turns out it might be permanent for some kids since they didn't keep proper records) is simply wrong, and you have to stop supporting the man even though he represents conservative ideas for the moment. 

 

Calling that out on CNN or wherever on the msm seems like the least that can be done. 

 

 

 

 

Making it partisan is what makes CNN a joke.  Its been standard procedure to separate families for .. ever.  Obama's border agents did it.  Bush's.  Clinton's.  Bush's.  Reagan's.  The fact that now its a problem, and all on Trump, is a sad joke.  Another little tidbit that the MSM will not mention, is that 80% of the kids detained, are ALONE.  Their "loving parents" shipped them off over the border. Alone.  Now THAT is crazy.

[JM_]

6 hours ago, xereau said:

Making it partisan is what makes CNN a joke.  Its been standard procedure to separate families for .. ever.  Obama's border agents did it.  Bush's.  Clinton's.  Bush's.  Reagan's.  The fact that now its a problem, and all on Trump, is a sad joke.  Another little tidbit that the MSM will not mention, is that 80% of the kids detained, are ALONE.  Their "loving parents" shipped them off over the border. Alone.  Now THAT is crazy.

So tell me one reporter or organization, or person for that matter, that doesn't have a partisan slant? thats not a reason to dismiss reports outright. You're doing it right now, its been shown by multiple sources that Trump's policy is new, its not the same thing as previous governments and i think you know that but you said that line anyway to make a point (https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jun/19/matt-schlapp/no-donald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/).

 

That's the problem, people are hyper-focused on distorted ideas of "source credibility" vs. just looking at an issue for what it is. Trumps policy was new and went too far. Thats simply a fact whether or not CNN or Bloomberg or whoever did a story on it. Its an objective thing that more than one source has reported on. The whole idea of source credibility distortion is what drives some people on the far left to dismiss people based on race, or people on the far right to call everything in the msm "fake" simply because its main stream.

 

As far as the loving parents line, try to imagine for a moment what it would take for you to send your child alone to the US, do you think that parents that didn't care about their kids future would go do that because they don't care? really? 

 

[Rob_Zepp]

8 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

it doesn't limit speech, it just says you can't discriminate on the additional basis of gender identity along with the other things that were in the law. Is that really a bad thing? 

Not the way I read it.   What it seems to imply is that it removes the freedom to choose how one wishes to address another and makes it unlawful (jail? A fine?) otherwise.   Pretty grey area Jimmy. Hard to read someone’s mind to know what they identify as.

[Rob_Zepp]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

As far as the loving parents line, try to imagine for a moment what it would take for you to send your child alone to the US, do you think that parents that didn't care about their kids future would go al that because they don't care? really? 

I cannot even begin to understand motive but for some to then blame the US government for not reuniting those kids with parents when the parents are not with the children - makes it a bloody complex issue and when this is the majority (small or vast majority depends on your news source - another sad reality) of the kids that are separated.....

 

it it is a sh*tshow but not the easy fix of a be some of the looney left imply.   It is also crueler and more heavy-handed than those on the right imply.   It is a mess both “sides” are using more than they are trying to find a fix.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Not the way I read it.   What it seems to imply is that it removes the freedom to choose how one wishes to address another and makes it unlawful (jail? A fine?) otherwise.   Pretty grey area Jimmy. Hard to read someone’s mind to know what they identify as.

it helps to look at the actual legal change in this case tho.

 

2 Subsection 3(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

 

 

Prohibited grounds of discrimination

 

3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

 

It doesn't create anything new or specifically address speech. E.g., you can't discriminate based on race or age, but the law doesn't specifically state you must call someone a certain thing for any of the protected areas. The wording for gender identity is identical as the amendment just added the phrase to the list of things already in the law. 

 

II know it can be spun into all kinds of 'what if' stories but I don't see how its any different than the other categories.

[Rob_Zepp]

1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

it helps to look at the actual legal change in this case tho.

 

2 Subsection 3(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

 

 

Prohibited grounds of discrimination

 

3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

 

It doesn't create anything new or specifically address speech. E.g., you can't discriminate based on race or age, but the law doesn't specifically state you must call someone a certain thing for any of the protected areas. The wording for gender identity is identical as the amendment just added the phrase to the list of things already in the law. 

 

II know it can be spun into all kinds of 'what if' stories but I don't see how its any different than the other categories.

I probably watch too many Jordan Peterson videos on flights.....

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I cannot even begin to understand motive but for some to then blame the US government for not reuniting those kids with parents when the parents are not with the children - makes it a bloody complex issue and when this is the majority (small or vast majority depends on your news source - another sad reality) of the kids that are separated.....

 

it it is a sh*tshow but not the easy fix of a be some of the looney left imply.   It is also crueler and more heavy-handed than those on the right imply.   It is a mess both “sides” are using more than they are trying to find a fix.

yah we're in agreement on this for sure, its not easy at all. Some new policy or ridiculous wall won't help. I think we've talked about this before, we need to do more to help these countries build up their economies so people don't need to flee in the first place. 

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I probably watch too many Jordan Peterson videos on flights.....

The idea of things like denial of service based on some discrimination (religious based in particular) just seems wholly un-Canadian to me. I'd rather err a little to human rights vs. create a situation like we see in the US. So if this legal change keeps us a little more on the side of rights I'm fine with that. But thats my bias. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

12 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

The idea of things like denial of service based on some discrimination (religious based in particular) just seems wholly un-Canadian to me. I'd rather err a little to human rights vs. create a situation like we see in the US. So if this legal change keeps us a little more on the side of rights I'm fine with that. But thats my bias. 

But what happens when a transgender person who, while biologically a man, identifies as a woman, is, for example, allowed to compete in an all female martial arts tournament or something along those lines? Furthermore, what exactly qualifies as "hate propaganda"? A lot of the political pundits I frequently listen to would be considered by some to be hate peddlers, despite that obviously not being the case. Point being that what qualifies as "hate" is largely subjective, and I really don't trust the government to make that determination for me or anyone else. 

[JM_]

42 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

But what happens when a transgender person who, while biologically a man, identifies as a woman, is, for example, allowed to compete in an all female martial arts tournament or something along those lines?

--

 

42 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Furthermore, what exactly qualifies as "hate propaganda"? A lot of the political pundits I frequently listen to would be considered by some to be hate peddlers, despite that obviously not being the case. Point being that what qualifies as "hate" is largely subjective, and I really don't trust the government to make that determination for me or anyone else. 

dunno - weight classes maybe? thats an interesting question based on the assumption of muscle mass giving an unfair advantage I suppose. 

--

 

the law has worked out reasonable limits on whats hate speech for other groups, I'm sure it will follow a similar path. And its not "government" deciding its the courts. Based on previous experience Canada has had with setting limits on hate speech there's no reason to think this would be any different or less reasonable. 

 

[xereau]

10 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

it doesn't limit speech, it just says you can't discriminate on the additional basis of gender identity along with the other things that were in the law. Is that really a bad thing? 

It compels speech.  If someone that identifies as a fire hydrant, and you refuse to call them a fire hydrant, they can press charges.  Man.  It is dangerous legislation.

[Gurn]

25 minutes ago, xereau said:

It compels speech.  If someone that identifies as a fire hydrant, and you refuse to call them a fire hydrant, they can press charges.  Man.  It is dangerous legislation.

They will change their "identity" right after the first dog pees on them.  No problem, why the worry?

[Rob_Zepp]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

The idea of things like denial of service based on some discrimination (religious based in particular) just seems wholly un-Canadian to me. I'd rather err a little to human rights vs. create a situation like we see in the US. So if this legal change keeps us a little more on the side of rights I'm fine with that. But thats my bias. 

Jimmy - spend a month or two in Sweden or Germany right now and you may get a good idea where Canada will hopefully not get to but is dangerously on the path to in what I can see unless there is a collective good shake of the head.

[189lb enforcers?]

11 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

OK but we can have a discussion on border issues and try to find some kind of consensus like reasonable people most of the time.

 

But sometimes things like separating families as a deterrent (and it turns out it might be permanent for some kids since they didn't keep proper records) is simply wrong, and you have to stop supporting the man even though he represents conservative ideas for the moment. 

 

Calling that out on CNN or wherever on the msm seems like the least that can be done. 

 

 

 

 

Trump though, for all of his trolling is a superior human than Hillary and her disgusting past of harbouring child rapists, but that’s just my moral compass and conviction. I’m not selling it to anyone. Both mamals are examples of filth,but I need not enjoy the rhetoric of one to prescribe to their political leanings and, by proxy, become filthy myself. 

 

Had Hillary won, none of her past would have been daily news like Trump is because of the interests and agenda behind the media The sheeple are being distracted. Mission accomplished on sepating the herd. Divide and Conquer. 

 

The media is using people to push away from conservative ideals by making Trump into an egnimatic enemy of the people. (You support Trump, you are a BAD human, so I hear)

 

It’s an interesting time to be a casual observer of Human Behaviour. We are still a herd animal at our essence; still a creature in need of creed, acceptance and belonging, easily (mis)led by others. (See Religion for the ultimate example of the human condition) Now people literally “follow” media. 

 

I am happy to hear that the counter culture to those efforts is a return to the ideals conservatism by the youth. The smear campaign of the western values has back-fired on those who are done with the human-puppetry and selling-out of the founding, majority culture and it’s resources by the marxists. The youth don’t seem buy any pretence of an inherited guilt or shame about “their” past or their absolute right to equality and accountability in their society. Division is not how they seem to approach their wold views. 

 

In my estimations, these are the people who best represent the true values of conservatism, as I understand it at least, in that they belive in personal accountability to society and equality and opportunity for all who seek it. Special interest groups and identity politics interference appear to be ineffective on this emerging demographic of voters. 

 

I like the baby steps Zepp has been offering the forum via these latest threads which are slowly asking the provocative morality questions against the grain in here through thread titles and content.

 

You can’t un-see the strings you’re tied to from the media outlets. Once you have, division politics and the media are vehemently avoided whenever possible. Alternate means of attaining “news” and information becomes paramount. By proxy, these type of threads will force some recognition and self awareness of the average consumer’s utter reliance/addiction to their connectivity to the social engineering campaigns of the media. 

 

PC virtue signalling is rewarded all around us, far more so than concepts community and even nationalism. For example, you can’t watch a hockey game, live or at home, without being bombarded with messages about identity politics in all forms at key times during these and other events. The messages have become so pervasive that they are being passed of as the norm by those emersed in the messaging itself. 

 

I think that the emerging counter culture recognizes these indoctrinations for their spirit of divisiveness against cohesion and the personal accountability to social well-being of the collective. This ‘Author’ business is but a point in time on a perpetually swinging pendulum of controlling interests; politics. It will pass. 

 

Though I do not prescribe to the division politics, I must make the hypocritical distinction here and state that the Left has controlled every input towards the grooming of the Millennials, to exact out a (social) media and MSM demographic-raised contingent of our current society, to the point where this voting demographic is now a faithful parrot of their supplier/dealer’s words. We have witnessed an era of watchers, not doers, in this regard; the Participation Award Generation, as has been fittingly said by some. More than any other, this generation of voters has been fully programmed by their reliance on media. 

 

There are truisms, in the making, of a generation of Consumer which will undoubtedly be soon defined as a social regression plot against the people by the media machine’s owners. (This is the 1% villain which was so largely detested by this generation of protest in the first place. Yet, ironically, the Left, as the shoe fits here, continues to belive that they represent the interests of the consumer, the little guy, while executing a strategy of civil upheaval by the MSM, the true, global, mega-corporation. Insanity)

 

Our children don't stand a chance in a society raised on PC, virtue signalling values. These are the hollow, dreamy, short-sighted utopias whose practice of have turned Europe into emerging ghettos and wastelands; case studies for examples of what the reality is behind ideals of “diversity”, for instance. To write about this is to lose your funding, grants or tenure. This is to say that you are not to acknowledge the forthcoming planning for social change in your own land or you will be made an example of. This is the Orwellian premise of 1984’s dismal view of a future controlled by an ever watchful, Big Brother. 

 

The Education Systems, the Media... everywhere you look you’ll find the indoctrination of the mind, especially evident is the reliance on the agenda-based discernment of it via media. The reliance on connectivity to the internet is truely inhuman, at least in my estimation. 

 

Systematically, facts have been replaced with slogans, feelings and the promise of equity in a social utopia. Simultaneously, clear examples of the reality and the devastation of such concepts also surround us. With apparent indifference, the herd obeys systemized instructed to ignore such forecasts and condemn those who speak out against it. 

 

The Death of the Author, IMO, is the death of individualism and signals the end of free speech, in its literal sense, just as it was in Orwell’s 1984. Anyone who hasn’t read it by now, unabridged, must.

 

However, I have faith in our youth who will work to undo the damage done by the drones of the media, so clearly identifiable as a posting demographic on this site and in our society at large. The pendulum is about to swing back to reality and the health of the independent mind will once again be judged on not what it thinks, but how it thinks. Reasoning Man, a cognitive distinction which I hope our creature soon returns to.