How to know if you are in the oppressive party \ stacker news ~FiresidePhilosophy

pull down to refresh

How to know if you are in the oppressive party

5007 sats \ 22 comments \ @Voldemort 10 Apr FiresidePhilosophy

The other day on social media I saw a bunch of comments about trans women in sports. One thing that was a bit shocking was how much those who are against trans women playing with women in sports qualified their statements.

So many of them began with varying levels of letting people know they are a trans/LGBTQ supporter, or that they work with trans people, or that they are friends or have family with trans people before they ultimately say they don't think trans women should compete against biological women.

I couldn't help but think what a sad state of affairs this is, where one cannot simply voice a seemingly mild opinion without being categorized as a bigot.

Then it got me thinking - if people have to qualify statements that might go against the grain of a certain political ideology, it is a good signal that party is or aims to be oppressive.

In all oppressive regimes, people are punished for speaking against the party or against their views. In the US, you get cancelled or labeled as a bigot if you espouse views that liberals might find offensive. Even Presidents of universities were unwilling to say that calling for the genocide of jews was against their schools' policies. Meanwhile, if someone says trans women shouldn't be allowed to compete against biological women in sports, they are considered a bigot. This is what necessitates the qualification.

It would be fascinating if someone could measure this overtime. I have got to imagine someone in Germany once said a statement like "I totally support hitler and the nazi's, but are we sure we should be exterminating the Jewish race? Totally support Hitler though. Heil."

This can be applied for more than just politics.

It actually occurs on this site fairly frequently, which you'd not expect given the libertarian lean. Indeed, when people on this site talk about the price of bitcoin it is always qualified with "I know price doesn't matter but." Likewise for alt coins. "I am thinking about investing in something other than bitcoin" is often accompanied by a qualifier or disclaimer that they are not interested in "shitcoins."

Just something to consider.

view all related items

282 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 10 Apr

This is a great point. I clearly remember the Bush years when the shoe was definitely on the other foot:

"9/11 was horrific, but are we sure waging two endless wars against people who didn't do it is such a great idea?"

"I support the troops, but I don't think we should be fighting these wars."

15 sats \ 0 replies \ @Voldemort OP 10 Apr

Excellent examples

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Apr

Iraq 🇮🇶 was definitely a misguided mission

272 sats \ 0 replies \ @frostdragon 10 Apr

This is fascinating to think through, because I find myself giving qualifying statements all the time.

I see qualifying statements as a useful tactic to try to pull people away from bias, or extreme/one-sided views. In a debate, it seems essential to establish points of agreement, and only from a common foundation can you examine the validity of claims and logical arguments from there. Playing defensively like that is likely to cause your opponent to over extend, slip up, look foolish, and be less likely to make such bold claims in the future now that they see how dumb it looks. They won't change their mind, but they might inch closer to the center (that is, if they don't double down further into bias, which unfortunately is common).

But maybe sometimes it's more important to take advantage of a sound position, destroy the argument, and take a firm stand for what's right regardless of the practical outcome of the conversation. Of course, now that I say that, I don't love the sound of it in this age of polarization.

Great post. Super important to identify this pattern and determine whether or not it indicates moral failure.

200 sats \ 1 reply \ @elvismercury 11 Apr

Great post. I'd never thought about the "measuring qualifying statements" as correlate of anything. I wonder if you could do NLP on various forms of media and actually chart this? It would come down to how easily you could recognize those hedging statements. Fascinating idea.

It actually occurs on this site fairly frequently, which you'd not expect given the libertarian lean.

I think you're right. People do what people do: they are biased, self-serving, bad listeners, and avoidant of uncomfortable information. That's human beings, of which SN users and bitcoiners are a subset.

The ability -- the desire -- to stare at reality and not flinch doesn't correlate with any sizeable group that I've ever found. Bitcoiners believe themselves to be exceptional, and in believing it, prove that they aren't. Not about this, anyway.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Voldemort OP 11 Apr

I think it would be fascinating as well. If one wanted to conduct a less technically sound experiment, one could simply go on various social media and make comments that have the exact same point of view but with and without qualifiers and document the responses they get.

One downstream implication could be how AI models use this data for context. IE, if something needs qualifications maybe it deems it as controversial whereas if something does not need qualifications it is not controversial.

211 sats \ 2 replies \ @Coinsreporter 11 Apr

Recently, I wrote an article where I told about my intentions of investing in something else than Bitcoin. I clearly mentioned that I wasn't interested in shitcoins, rather in Gold or Real-estate. I just asked, what's wrong when someone wants to just invest in real-estate or Gold?

#500264

While, I was curious to know the opinion of as many Stackers as there on SN, It recieved only 1 comment from @grayruby and nothing else.

This isn't the only thing for I am clueless, nobody called me a shitcoiner or 'hey, Bitcoin is inevitable and you're not paying attention' blah blah blah...

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Voldemort OP 11 Apr

Nothing wrong with that - my point is that if someone wants to invest in other coins, or might be open to it, it is met with derision. Personally, I think there are other tokens that will provide a lot of value that bitcoin, due to its tokenomics, can't provide. If I were to bring it up it would be trolled immediately. So nothing wrong with saying you don't want to, I think when bringing it up becomes a necessity it is worth reflecting on. Are you (not you specifically) so closed to hearing other things that people have to qualify their statements?

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 11 Apr

Well said! I don't want that people have to qualify for things as easy as words and sentences.

20 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 10 Apr

Great post and thoughts. Something all of us should think about because we are probably on both sides of this depending on the group we are in or the topic being discussed.

120 sats \ 5 replies \ @DesertDave 10 Apr

Qualifying statements drive me nuts. The pandering bothers me more than people who are just confused. Stand up for what you believe!

21 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Apr

And you will still get attacked by the usual suspects despite qualifying or pandering statements

10 sats \ 3 replies \ @DesertDave 10 Apr

Right. So why do it. I'm so over it.

11 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Apr

It’s almost impossible to have an honest discussion about affirmative action or immigration without someone playing the race card

I’ve become immune or indifferent depending on the day of the week

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @DesertDave 10 Apr

This is the way. I feel like not engaging and focusing elsewhere is the way to make impact.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Apr

The rule about avoiding religion and politics is a good one

Silence is underrated

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @voxmagdalenea 10 Apr

Right, it would be the equivalent of saying I am a 'nazi' but I don't think we should commit mass genocide.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @stack_harder 20 Sep

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 11 Apr

Any party that doesn’t tolerate dissent or alternative ideas

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinIsTheFuture 11 Apr

Great examples and very thought provoking. I tend to agree!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 10 Apr

I heard a new one yesterday: you are nothing but a Blockstream sock

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jk_14 10 Apr freebie

I was always loud that trans shouldn't compete against biological women. With no additional bells and whistles :) Joanna Jozwik was robbed of olimpic medal in Rio de Janeiro 2016 because of that...