| sc94597 said: So the point of a discussion forum (that is where we are) is to discuss the topic. What exactly is the general point you're making here about my comments? That his opinion should be consumed uncritically because of a status he shared with millions of other men in his period of time and which he had little choice over? What if my grandfather and great-grandfather (both WWII Vets who fought for the Allies) disagreed with it? What then? Whose opinion takes precedence? He didn't talk about any specific freedoms. His assertion was a general assessment of the state of things then and now. Without any elaboration, we can only speculate. |
I said he earned to be listened to, and that would apply to you relatives as well.
But the point is: you disingeniously misrepresent his opinion to further a vibe you felt was off. Aka a strawmen. And yes, we can only speculate which freedoms he meant, but you ignore another important part. I explain that as a quote to you in a moment further.
sc94597 said:
None of this was in the OP. For example, the word's "Putin","Trump" and "corporate control" weren't in the OP. If they were, my comment would be different. You seem to agree with Alec, so what freedoms are worse now generally than they were in his day? One example being brought up by others is free-speech, but if you click on The Mental Deficiency Act of 1913 link you'd see that people were put into mental institutions for decades solely for being "moral defectives." So I am not sure what sort of free speech existed then. |
Yes, I said this as counterexamples to yours, to show that there is no linear "he is wrong I am right" position. There are a lot of freedoms, a lot of things he can talk about. You bringing up Mental Deficiency Act and Turing isn't disproving at all anything he says. Even if you keep beating that horse. That is why I brought up other examples.
| sc94597 said: My comment that you quoted was more about the people sharing this as some sort of appeal to authority about whether or not we live in freer and better societies today than his was during the war, than him specifically. If it is just his personal views that he is holding to himself, then how do we generalize it beyond that? What is the point of sharing the story in the politics sub-forum? That's what the original comment was. |
And there is the strawmen. You bring it up as "others present it", but you comment on him, not these nebulous others. So let's be real: we talk about the validity of his comments, not what idiots on the internet say. But moreover: "some sort of appeal to authority about whether or not we live in freer and better societies today than his was during the war". No it isn't, that is your strawmen. He said that it was not worth the sacrifice. That means he can actually fully agree with you or me, that our society has shown progress, just he feels not enough to justify the sacrifice — which was enormous! You keep on and on and on about here and there we won freedoms, but you fail to balance it against the sacrifice. But that was the point he said.
You are right we don't know which freedoms he spoke about. But we sure as hell know which sacrifice he spoke about and we know how big that was. But you keep on saying "Gotcha, here is a law that got better, see he is wrong." Which only works because you leave out the sacrifice and misrepresent his position as "whether or not we live in freer and better societies today than his was during the war". This sort of toxic discussion style with misrepresentation riles me up.
And if you ramble against nebulous people on the internet, be specific, cite the people you ramble against, because what I see right now is his position, not some unhinged internet crackpot.
sc94597 said:
Clarify your position here. Are you saying the real fascists or those who fuel fascist propaganda are the social democrats and social liberals and not the far-right and their enablers? If so, I don't know if we're going to align here. We probably would more fruitfully discuss the freedom question. |
You keep on saying his words are fueling right-wing propaganda (which I actually don't see, but maybe, I don't watch the whole internet). All I am saying that words of people that are far better positioned to control their words are used by right-wing propaganda as well, so maybe ramble against them instead of an old man.
But no, you are so deeply into the mode that you have to *win* discussions by misrepresenting what people said, so you are presenting my words as: "Are you saying the real fascists or those who fuel fascist propaganda are the social democrats and social liberals". Yeah, sure buddy. You win internet gummi points. Be happy. In your circle of three other terminally online people you can take that as a badge of honour, while more and more people are just tired of this rhethoric games and some of them actually elect the side opposite to yours, just to show you off.
Instead of the permanent need to show people off, the need to misrepresent them to *win*, you should step back and listen.
| sc94597 said: Anyway, I am not "making an old man a target" I am discussing what he said, which is he isn't sure that his sacrifices "helped bring about a better world" because he thinks his current world is less free than the old one. I do believe he believes that, and I don't think he intends for it to be used as propaganda for fascists. But my comments here are to express my disagreement with his position and to point out that fascists are indeed using his words as propaganda. That's the point of a discussion forum -- to discuss the topic at hand. |
No, you did not discuss his words, as you keep trudging your strawmen of (your words just now) "because he thinks his current world is less free than the old one." Such toxic discussion styles is why the internet is shit now. So no, you are not discussing his words, you are rambling against a mind-constructed mutated version of his words that are entirely yours. But you are probably have convinced yourself first that this is his meaning.
And fascist use his words as propaganda — fascist, and in fact all propagandist of all coleur, will use everything. So ramble against these fascist propagandist you keep seeing, not against this man.
