Disgraceful Rant. Fredzed, I Think It's Time To Send Selina Packing

[satisfied]

If ever there was a post which justified expulsion from these boards, this is it. Comments???

From Selina:

"That's it, the last straw....."Canuckistan" eh Pat Buchanan? Witness the power of the American media who gives voice to right-wing wacko millitiamen and T.V. preachers.....
I say: Boycott McDonalds, stop drinking Coke, go to Cuba instead of being interrogated, photographed and raped of half your money, cancel your subscription to all TIMER/WARNER/AOL propaganda, drop the stupid sitcom habit and check out the BBC and CBC.
Thanks America, for guarding us all these years to ensure a benign border so that YOU will have ample access to our tar sands(more oil than Saudi Arabia) and the world's largest supply of fresh water, for if we ever decide to stop selling it, you will TAKE it anyway.....
Thanks for bombing our boys to pieces, booing our national anthem, global goodwill, SUV's, napalm and inside-trader millionaire friends of unelected Presidents.....
Now that you have so many enemies, where will you hide? How about building a Berlin/Isreali style wall?
You rail in hysterical paranoid fits and plot to lash out wildly at the most convenient of victims, your former client-states. Friends today, Foes tomorrow......
WAKE UP CANADA and align with the rest of the world, not Tony Blair and Dubya! We are now officially members of the Axis of Evil!

www.yorick.infinitejest.org:81/1/cards.html

P.S., Niplust: Stay away from me, I bite!
P.P.S., Where's Wired for (shoe bomb) Sound?"

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I think that no matter what one thinks of Selina's views, those of conscience should agree on her right to express them.

Voltaire settled the argument a long time ago, and forgive me for paraphrasing but I don't have the text handy, when he said this (roughly): "I thuroughly despise every word you say, but I would die for your right to say them..."

Freedom of speech and expression are fundamental. It is curious that while we say we will not change in the face of terror we continue to capitulate to them by embracing further restrictions on our basic rights.

The world is facing a very complex crisis, naturally there will be views expressed that are contrary to mainstream belief. My advice is if there is nothing you think you can gain by listening to alternate voices and perspectives you could either debate and bring facts to the table to counter the argument or simply excercise your freedom of choice and not listen at all.

To ask for dissenting views to be silenced is to beg for fascism.

That being said, this is Fred's board, not the village square, and if Fred feels that Selina or anyone else has gone to far it is his call to make. However, seeing how long the post in question has been left up, I think he is willing to be tolerant and that is to his credit in my opinion.

 

[Goober Mcfly]

<Austin Powers voice> Could "satisfied" be "dis-satisfied"? Mehehehehehe?</Austin Powers voice>

 

[niplust]

What standard of coherence?

The problem is we're still waiting for her to express her views.......coherently that is.


CC

I find it much easier to understand Selina than to try to comprehend what Jean Chretien says most of the time.

If coherence is the standard, I say, Selina should be Prime Minister. She can do no worse than what we have now. Furthermore, judging by her website, I think the campaign literature will be much more stimulating.

Cheers

 

[Goober Mcfly]

I agree with niplust. We're fucked either way.

 

[niplust]

Selina to Xaviera

The only worry if Selina were to become Prime Minister, is that she may come under the influence of Sheila Copps and begin over-eating and become another 400 lb Dutch SP like Xaviera Hollander.

Perish the thought. Ugh!

Cheers

 

[onthebottom]

Fred, Don't ban her

Guys, just don't buy from her. Even a fool has a right to their opinion.

OTB

 

[scubadoo]

Re: Hey

Sarcasm alert: If you don't like it, say something witty in response.

Or you can just ignore her! That is the best course of action to take.

My father once gave me a great piece of advice and it goes like this " Son, never get involved in an arguement with a idiot, they'll only drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"


Just my 4 cents worth

 

[Wired For Sound]

The Theater of the Absurd

I think that no matter what one thinks of Selina's views, those of conscience should agree on her right to express them.

Voltaire settled the argument a long time ago, and forgive me for paraphrasing but I don't have the text handy, when he said this (roughly): "I thuroughly despise every word you say, but I would die for your right to say them..."

Freedom of speech and expression are fundamental. It is curious that while we say we will not change in the face of terror we continue to capitulate to them by embracing further restrictions on our basic rights.

The world is facing a very complex crisis, naturally there will be views expressed that are contrary to mainstream belief. My advice is if there is nothing you think you can gain by listening to alternate voices and perspectives you could either debate and bring facts to the table to counter the argument or simply excercise your freedom of choice and not listen at all.

To ask for dissenting views to be silenced is to beg for fascism.

That being said, this is Fred's board, not the village square, and if Fred feels that Selina or anyone else has gone to far it is his call to make. However, seeing how long the post in question has been left up, I think he is willing to be tolerant and that is to his credit in my opinion.

What a bizarre spectacle. Here we have Dr Gonzo who necessarily opposes the dominant political agenda the philosophe's of the Enlightenment period (ie, Free markets and free minds) referring to Voltaire's famous statement about Rousseau's work ( Btw, Dr Gonzo is very much a Rousseauian). That statement is widely quoted in defense of free speech. Dr Gonzo, then claims that there is such things as basic rights (there is) that we all have and that they're fundamental.

If I didn't know better I'd think Dr Gonzo was a defender of 18th Century classical liberalism in the spirit of John Locke(who successfully fought for the very toleration that Dr Gonzo claims he wants us to have). But the truth is that his political philosophy is the exact antithesis to the defense of basic rights that he claims to support. Gonzo's ideas intellectually undercut individual rights because he's a collectivist. Even a person with a rudimentry understanding of the origins of individualism and collectivism knows that they're rivaling political philosophies.

The muddle headed Dr Gonzo probably believes that he can defend personal freedoms and be an opponent of the very economic freedoms that these very philosophers fought for. How foolish -- because this is a ridiculous false dichotomy: If the collective can control me financially(the results of *my* labour) than they're necessarily restricting my personal freedom(I need money to survive). And, of course, empirically, history has shown this to be true as well. How much personal freedom exists in China, North Korea, or Cuba?

 

[niplust]

Re: Dear Wired

Consider the tension between two values:
individual freedom and the power of the majority.
Consider the measuring of a scale. On each scale
there are two balancing weights. One tips to the
right of the individual; one tips to the left of the
majority. Try Jeramy Bentham and John Stewart
Mill. This argument has been going on since the
mid 1820's. The underlying issue is "What is Social
Justice?" The two tensions are like the dna molecule.
Two strands winding about themselves. The two
tensions are like the ying and the yang, one contained
in the other. The two are like woman and man, each
struggling for the same end from opposite ends.

Bottom line: don't think "either-or"; think "both-and".

Ciao, DQ

Dear DonQuixote:

There is a third pan on you balance which we in Canada experience more than anyone else. That is the rights of the minority superceding the rights of the majority - this is so-called political correctness.

This is where it is not acceptable to call a Christmas tree by its name because some unidentified minority may be offended. It is when it is not acceptable to say that Toronto has a Jamacan Gang crime problem because most Jamacans are black and that could be construed a racism. It is when real "morons" at CBC decide that it is sexist to refer to a fisherman and invent a new word "fishers" which is gender neurtal. This is the opression by the minority that we live under in Canada.

Don, this fits neither with individual freedoms nor collective rights. It is a unique Canadian form of moronic oppression.

Cheers

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Wired: Once again I laugh at your attempts to pigeonhole me into a framework you can understand. You think you can so easily categorize me and thus dismiss me. What you fail to grasp is that I cling to no single doctrine, save that of my conscience.

It strikes me that personal freedom is paramount. What I do not see is how that needs to include the right to exploit, the right to profit endlessly. It should be clear by now that extremes of wealth require extremes of poverty in order to exist under our current doctrine. I do not feel the right to personal profit supercedes anothers right to exist and pursue a meaninigful existence. This is of course lost on you, so I won't waste my breath on the matter any longer.

You may want to get your facts straight about Voltaire, however. The quote in question, "I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" is from a letter to M. leRiche in 1770, not to Rousseau. At least as I understand it.

You are welcome to pursue the relentless selfish agenda of profit and exploitation. Just don't come crying when the planets resources have dried up and those whose backs you made your extravagent wealth on come to you for answers.

What will you do with your money then?

But I think this is a serious digression from the subject of this thread and really has no place here. If you are so inclined to shame me, perhaps begin a thread on the topic. I'm certain you'd have no shortage of posters willing to take their turn at bashing me down.

 

[*d*]

...the rights of the minority superceding the rights of the majority - this is so-called political correctness.
...not acceptable to call a Christmas tree by its name because some unidentified minority may be offended.
...not acceptable to say that Toronto has a Jamacan Gang crime problem because most Jamacans are black and that could be construed a racism.
...invent a new word "fishers" which is gender neurtal.

niplust
Canada tries to respect everyones rights on as many levels as possible. Being multicultural we also listen and respect all cultures and traditions, may they be a minority or majority. When cultures clash we compromise. I for one wouldn't have it any other way. Even the stubborn complacent sexist and racist minorities like yourself are able to bitch.

To Wired for Sound: -I'm still waiting for that apology.

d

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I think the best thing we can do with opinions we don't like is to let them challenge us. Let them make us question our own beliefs. We may find our beliefs strengthened by such reflection, or we may find we aren't as sure as we'd like to be and lead to further reflection and insight and perhaps a shift in our thinking.

This is neither bad nor dangerous. In fact, this is the most reasonable way to manage ones beliefs I can think of. Constant re-evaluation. Constant testing. Much preferable in my mind to standing fast on potentially shifty ground.

You may not like what Selina says, you may say it makes no sense. You may think the same about me and my ramblings on here. But do your beliefs the honor of stepping up and taking the challenge. If you aren't convinced, then great you can rest assured in the belief you are correct. But you just might learn a thing or two along the way. I certainly have learned quite a bit from people like Wired, EBS and the like. I appreciate the dialogue we have, despite and in fact because of our differences.

 

[niplust]

*d*

niplust
Canada tries to respect everyones rights on as many levels as possible. Being multicultural we also listen and respect all cultures and traditions, may they be a minority or majority. When cultures clash we compromise. I for one wouldn't have it any other way. Even the stubborn complacent sexist and racist minorities like yourself are able to bitch.

d

Exactly my point.

I am not referring to multiculturalism, which simply allows other cultures to co-exist on an equal basis. I also support this.

It is when the fear of offending minorities (not just cultural minorities) is the main concern of those who run society. This is so-called political correctness.

I am not certain why observing this makes me subborn, complacent, sexist or racist. Perhaps these are labels that you like to affix to anyone who does not share all of your opinions. This is one tactic of correct types to label any who disagree with them.

In fact this has been an effective tactic that many minorities have used to get more than their fair entitlement. I have seen it happen over and over.

For example:

If you are an employer and you fire someone who is incompentent. You will find:

If they are female, they will call you a sexist.
If if they are non-caucasian you are a racist.
If they are gay, you are homophobic.
If they are handicapped - wait a minute. It is impossible to fire someone who is handicapped.

Go into any federal or provincial government office and you will see I am correct. All that is left are those who cannot be fired. The competent people have all left in frustration to better jobs.

And so it goes. A tyranny of the minority. But *d* you know this already. No doubt you have used and abused the system for years. Was that you I saw behind the counter at the assessment office, decorating the "Holiday Tree"?

Cheers

 

[pool]

Just for the record, I'm strongly in the Voltaire camp on this one.

We need people like Selina around just to give us a slightly clearer view , and remind us of da "big picture" ...

Although I don't agree with all her views, I can empathise to an extent. I don't agree with those who oppose her necessarily either, but somewhere in the middle is the truth ...

Finding that truth is so much more important than being "right"

Anyone who thinks her posts are completely wrong and should be "suppressed" are just burying their heads in the sand ...

 

[vidi vici veni]

Re: *d*

[snip]
If they are female, they will call you a sexist.
If if they are non-caucasian you are a racist.
If they are gay, you are homophobic.
If they are handicapped - wait a minute. It is impossible to fire someone who is handicapped.

[snip]And so it goes. A tyranny of the minority.

Nice to see that you still have something to bitch about!

vvv

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Wired

I guess I just haven't made myself clear enough yet. So let me be dispense with flowery prose and get down to it.

I really don't care if you make a million dollars. Or even a billion dollars. Just don't fuck over any one else to do so. It's that simple. You are free to innovate, free to pursue your goals, free to make money. Just don't impede on anyone else's right to fundamentally exist and pursue happiness while you do so.

Have a free market. Have a free market fucking parade. Make heaping piles of cash. But do it because your product/service is just that good, not because you learned you could subcontract all of your production to South East Asia or Central America and exploit cheap labor and little or no environmental laws. Drive a bloody Bentley, wear a rolex, buy your custom tailored Brooks Brothers suits. Just don't do it with money you earned by raping the planet and expect us to love you for it. Don't do it with money you won with coercion and violence. Don't sip fucking Martinis on your learjet while you watch people starve and die of diseases because YOU couldn't be bothered to pay them a fair wage, or keep the sludge from your factories out of their drinking water. Don't render our planet an ecological disiaster so you can make a fast buck.

And as far as my thinking on collectivism goes, I don't see it as the perfect solution. It's simply another way. Our way is NOT the be all, end all. We need to look for innovative solutions if we want to survive and I think that is one possible alternative out of many, and there are more to be discovered.

If this makes me some sort of fascist/totalitarian freak, then goddamn I better start growing my silly Hitler moustache and buy a pair of jackboots.

End of digression.

 

[train]

Ya ....kinda like reading Playboy for the articles ....lol

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I find it funny but only because it is refreshing. As heated as our debates can get, I appreciate them to a very large degree.

Wired is challenging. And he can back it up. I for one, completely respect that. I may disagree but at least he can put up an argument.

I wouldn't want this board any other way.

 

[penguin_jf]

Wired is under the mistaken impression (widely held by contemporary conservatives of the Rush Limbaugh ilk) that economics and politics are one and the same. It's all about the money, and he who dies with the most wins! Well, in a democracy, that MIGHT in fact be true (if the majority so chooses), but my suspicion is that in the long run the majority will not choose to let the 'alpha dogs' hog the food dish, and they'll just have to sputter and moan about 'free markets' to some other audience, or make the trains run on time. It's been amusing to watch the so called 'defenders of rights' (the conservative right - we're talking the United States here, BTW) take every opportunity they can to take those formerly precious rights away, all in the name of 'Homeland Security'. Security is more precious than freedom, apparently, at least if it will get you a majority in both the House and Senate. That way, drug companies can be let off the hook for any errors they may have made that might have damaged citizens, defense contractors can start to jostle for position at the trough of 'national defense' while those that feed them billions of dollars proclaim they want 'less government',the selfish masses that drive mammoth SUVs and pickup trucks continue to enjoy the privelige of 'Command Position' while they block the view of the rest of us and are granted immunity from fuel economy and emissions laws because they're driving 'commercial vehicles', the Saudis can be forgiven for their two-faced positions about relations with the West and their funding of radicals that would destroy all of us for the sake of $25 a barrel oil, and at the same time the oil that's in the ground here stays there because some day it will be worth $50 or $100 a barrel.
I hope and pray that I die before the world of those takes complete hold, and I suspect that they'll be glad, as that's one less vote against them!
There is no such thing as a 'compassionate conservative'.