Post by anony012 on Feb 19, 2019 19:23:05 GMT
I am against war.
I am against austerity.
Im against monopolists. Who are at the root of war and austerity.
===
ON CORBYN
Corbyn is an antiwar anti austerity british hero who has proven himslef as such over decades.
Therefore I am for Corbyn.
This does not mean i agree with him on everything. Or with his every action. But he is the best leader of the opposition He should be Prime Minister and that he is not is because of dangerous idiots who vote for evil tories..
ON PREJUDICE
I am for free speech except where it will lead to physical injury.
Prejudice against people on the basis of their memberhsip of a protected characteristic is typically likely to lead to physical injury. It therefore legitimately criminalised.
That a person is criticised or even physically attacked does not in itself prove that the attacker is attacking on the basis of the protected characteristics a person has. And anyone arguing such a thing, even if they can point to other people who ARE motivated by such prejudice to participate in the same or similar attacks, engages in prejudice of a different kind. Labour should seek to deliver us from all forms of prejudice and miscarraiges of justice. Laboiur says it seeks to do so in its aims and objectives.
===
ON LANGUAGE
1) when in social media or other public discussion, the common understanding of terms should be used.
2) the place where we typically should find the common understandings where there is any dispute, is the commonly available dictionaries except where those dictionaries clearly deviate from common understandings.
3) Dictionaries are open to political manipulation and on occasion mut be suspected and ignored. This is especially true with wikipedia.
Example: Oxford English dictionary states that antisemitism is defined as:- "noun: Hostility to or prejudice against Jews." We know this to be incorrect because this definition would mean that a person who had had his bike stolen by 2 jews and was hostile to them as a result of the bike theft would be categorised as antisemitic and this would be the case EVEN IF THE VICTIM OF THE THEFT DID NOT KNOW THE PERPETRATORS WERE JEWISH. We therefore reject the clumsy dangerous and flawed Oxford definition for the superior Merriam Webster one:- "Anti-Semitism definition is - hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group."
4) In social discussions we should use the understanding of the typical person of what terms mean. This way the fewest people will be misled.
5) In the event there are multiple common understandings we should not assume either is implied until the speaker specifies which is intended. To assume before specification is prejudice.
6) Where there are subjective understandings of what words mean that would naturally lead to confusion or conflict they should be rejected.
7) Where there are confusing definitions that would naturally lead to deception, they should be rejected.
These are all simple rules that improve inclusion, improve clarity and reduce the scope for deception.
ON CONFLATION:
If a word contains both negative and non negative connotations , we should be careful to disambiguate and where possible use other words.
EXAMPLE: "Conspiracy theory" for example is used often to imply "paranoid myth". It is also, more properly used to imply "explanation involving a secret harmful plan by a group of people." This can lead to situations where two people agree that a thing is happening while having entirely different understandings of what is happening and whather that is a good thing or not. In the case of conspiracy theory, that means that a person beleiving in one entirely valid theory is wrongly assumed to be gullible or paranoid enough to beleive in other non credible theories. A person who beleives in 9/11 controlled demolition can be conflated with someone who beleives the earth is flat. With dangerous consequences for the associated level of credibility they suffer.
Establishment deceivers use this as a linguistic trick that is founded upon the lack of clarity of the phrase "conspiracy theory".
Disambiguation resolves such issues.
I am against austerity.
Im against monopolists. Who are at the root of war and austerity.
===
ON CORBYN
Corbyn is an antiwar anti austerity british hero who has proven himslef as such over decades.
Therefore I am for Corbyn.
This does not mean i agree with him on everything. Or with his every action. But he is the best leader of the opposition He should be Prime Minister and that he is not is because of dangerous idiots who vote for evil tories..
===
===
ON PREJUDICE
I am for free speech except where it will lead to physical injury.
Prejudice against people on the basis of their memberhsip of a protected characteristic is typically likely to lead to physical injury. It therefore legitimately criminalised.
That a person is criticised or even physically attacked does not in itself prove that the attacker is attacking on the basis of the protected characteristics a person has. And anyone arguing such a thing, even if they can point to other people who ARE motivated by such prejudice to participate in the same or similar attacks, engages in prejudice of a different kind. Labour should seek to deliver us from all forms of prejudice and miscarraiges of justice. Laboiur says it seeks to do so in its aims and objectives.
===
ON LANGUAGE
1) when in social media or other public discussion, the common understanding of terms should be used.
2) the place where we typically should find the common understandings where there is any dispute, is the commonly available dictionaries except where those dictionaries clearly deviate from common understandings.
3) Dictionaries are open to political manipulation and on occasion mut be suspected and ignored. This is especially true with wikipedia.
Example: Oxford English dictionary states that antisemitism is defined as:- "noun: Hostility to or prejudice against Jews." We know this to be incorrect because this definition would mean that a person who had had his bike stolen by 2 jews and was hostile to them as a result of the bike theft would be categorised as antisemitic and this would be the case EVEN IF THE VICTIM OF THE THEFT DID NOT KNOW THE PERPETRATORS WERE JEWISH. We therefore reject the clumsy dangerous and flawed Oxford definition for the superior Merriam Webster one:- "Anti-Semitism definition is - hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group."
4) In social discussions we should use the understanding of the typical person of what terms mean. This way the fewest people will be misled.
5) In the event there are multiple common understandings we should not assume either is implied until the speaker specifies which is intended. To assume before specification is prejudice.
6) Where there are subjective understandings of what words mean that would naturally lead to confusion or conflict they should be rejected.
7) Where there are confusing definitions that would naturally lead to deception, they should be rejected.
These are all simple rules that improve inclusion, improve clarity and reduce the scope for deception.
ON CONFLATION:
If a word contains both negative and non negative connotations , we should be careful to disambiguate and where possible use other words.
EXAMPLE: "Conspiracy theory" for example is used often to imply "paranoid myth". It is also, more properly used to imply "explanation involving a secret harmful plan by a group of people." This can lead to situations where two people agree that a thing is happening while having entirely different understandings of what is happening and whather that is a good thing or not. In the case of conspiracy theory, that means that a person beleiving in one entirely valid theory is wrongly assumed to be gullible or paranoid enough to beleive in other non credible theories. A person who beleives in 9/11 controlled demolition can be conflated with someone who beleives the earth is flat. With dangerous consequences for the associated level of credibility they suffer.
Establishment deceivers use this as a linguistic trick that is founded upon the lack of clarity of the phrase "conspiracy theory".
Disambiguation resolves such issues.