/townhall/ - Townhall

I think this kind of thing has always been happening but it's at a noticably faster pace than before. Like, consider me disturbed!

>And then I go on reddit
I believe that's your mistake right there.

Near as I can tell, it's just the right common in these areas pushing back against the left that's started clambering in. It's not like these things were there first, after all.

Then again, perhaps it's a difference of worldviews. If you find banning abortion, CRT, or explicit and sexual books from schools as "disturbing", perhaps our standards are too different from one another to look at this matter in the same way.

>>10532
>So, out of curiosity, what's going on there?

I think their power grid failed again.

People never learn things and are easy to manipulate via fearmongering.

An ignorant populace is a boon for the right.

I mean, it's getting pretty hypocritically fascist down there.

>>10539
At first glance this looks like hyperbole, but apparently those political moves are very real.

In general, people mock the banning of the books in school, as kids can just get the books elsewhere, and I wonder if we'll get to a point where selling / possessing banned books can get you legal consequences.

>>10540

There's a whole lot of stuff that you can't find/do in schools which nonetheless permeates society.  Public school has always been a sort of sickly sanitized bubble into which you cannot bring the outside world.  While I don't support even more sanitization, I have no expectations that it will extend to the exterior, and ultimately the prohibition will proves fruitless, as it always does.

>>10540
I just don't think sexually explicit books belong in schools. But then I hrant the left has a long history of sexualizing minors, so maybe this is an issue of partisan worldviews.

Yeah this is what happens when two-party politics becomes one-party politics. The politicians involved are incapable of decent administration because pandering is easier than trying to fix problems. The way to get ahead isn't to be better but to pander harder.

Not saying my governor doesn't have a right to try to pass a social agenda. I'd just like him to acknowledge one of the three or four ongoing economic crises plaguing the state that he alone can address instead of outlawing the vague concept of "being woke" for the third time this year. We'd vote him out if anybody barely competent ran against him but an opposition party doesn't exist here in any meaningful way and he's a real "rising star" in The Party.

>>10544
And do I hear people mobilizing to protest this, nope.
But coming out like a tool to protest the face muzzles and the tyranny of the Medical scientists taking our freedom away in the pandemic? That's what mobilizes people.

No offence to you though

>>10532
I know well only the areas of Minnesota and South Dakota.

Critical Race Theory criticizes the state's actions when they are different based on race, I take it.

>abortions
Generally considered murder in South Dakota.  Generally considered a right in Minneapolis.

I've seen a lot about Maus online.  I never read it, plus even if I had, I'm not an expert on children and the question is whether it's age appropriate for 8th grade.

Book burning?  [Researching] "A controversial Tennessee pastor led a book burning on Wednesday night to fight “demonic influences”, with a crowd incinerating copies of books including Harry Potter and Twilight."

I don't know.  I remember people fearing those books would turn people to witchcraft from when they were first published.  That's probably only noteworthy in that they haven't found a worse book since then.

>Is this a new disturbing trend?
No.

I mean, disturbing, maybe.  But not new.

>>10539
Interesting.  Nazi's were politically affiliated with the NAZI party.  The proposal forbids blame to follow this association.  I don't know whether the NAZI state may be blamed.  I suppose NAZI subjects may be blamed as individuals, provided it does not involved any other protected categories.

Well if this law passes and if you are a teacher subject to it.  It will not effect my capacity to be critical of the Nazi party.  But people have said they'd prefer teachers just teach facts anyway and let students be the judge.

Yea, banning books should be a red flag, though it's not always unjustified.

Book burnings are a clear sign that something is terribly wrong. Ultimately though, I think what we currently have is fairly par for the course. It's just Christans mad that they don't rule over everyone with an iron fist anymore. This has been going on for over a century. Christans are mad that we don't stone and lynch the people they don't like anymore, and they've been throwing a tantrum about it for a century or two. Nothing new here.

Hell, I personality fucking hate CRT, and don't think it should be taught, tho I'm alright with the exception of optional classes for the future-terrorists/authoritarians that want it, tho I think a watchlist for those people is probably in order.

No way it moves north. This is very much a product of southern christian fundamentalist culture.

>>10532
>And then I go on reddit and there's news of book burnings happening.
E.g., https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/book-burning-at-ontario-francophone-schools-as-gesture-of-reconciliation-denounced
And also around 100 of Joe Rogan's podcasts were deleted by Spotify -- a digital equivalent of book burning.

>Is this a new disturbing trend?
Depends what you mean by "new".  Things were a lot better 15 years ago.

>>10545
I mean, freedom has never been about safety, and even if we presume somehow that to be the case, lockdowns have been universally demonstrated at this point to do nothing, and face masks have been repeatedly said not to work by your own so-called 'experts', who it has to be said often have major conflicts of interest, none the least of which is the seeming funding of the research which caused the virus in the first place.

I can see why people want to protest forceful violations of their rights that have massive economic repercussions and potential disastrous health effects, over schools not being allowed to indoctrinate kids any more or sexually explicit books not being in libraries intended for minors.

While it's genuinely horrifying to see right-wing activists trying their best to discriminate against students, parents, and teachers who are Jewish, gay, disabled, et al and ensure that the teaching in schools of racial and religious equality (as well as equality in general) is banned, this is just kind of the way things are right now.

Most Americans are not bigoted. Most Americans don't care what their neighbors do in terms of religious practices or whatever else. Most Americans, like most people, are fundamentally good and believe that others are inherently born equal, born free, and born good.

Unfortunately, something like 1/3 to 1/10 or so of the nation has chosen to make bigotry a part of their core identity and don't agree with living in a centrist democracy. They're hellbent on using the power of the government to discriminate, even the point of undermining democratic governance itself. That's just how it is.

In the end, though, I think that the power of this group both in terms of sheer numbers and ideological strength will wane. Younger generations are more and more compassionate and kind compared to older generations. They just are. Moral idealism is rising.

When it specifically comes to the political right-wing trying to make opposition to antisemitism a "woke" "Marxist" thing especially, the news is telling. Violence against Jewish people and overall prejudice against them attracts widespread condemnation from normal people. It's only the fringe types who spend way too much time on 4chan or whatever who actually pose a major issue. Very few Americans look at the right-wing activists banning 'Maus' and censoring school education on antisemitism positively.

For myself, and others, while it sucks to live in a country crammed to the gills full of terrible people with horrid beliefs, you just have to sort of live your life. Go about your day. Do what you can. Every little step in terms of basic human kindness matters. It really does.

>>10552
>While it's genuinely horrifying to see right-wing activists trying their best to discriminate against students, parents, and teachers who are Jewish, gay, disabled, et al and ensure that the teaching in schools of racial and religious equality (as well as equality in general) is banned, this is just kind of the way things are right now.
None of that is happening.
Nothing in the OP suggested anything of the sort like that was happening.

>When it specifically comes to the political right-wing trying to make opposition to antisemitism a "woke" "Marxist" thing especially, the news is telling.
Nobody's doing this.
None the least of which is because antisemitism is pretty massive on the left.
Especially in the UK, but certainly there's been more scandals of antisemitism from the left wing than the right in recent years..

>Very few Americans look at the right-wing activists banning 'Maus' and censoring school education on antisemitism positively
Probably because that narrative is not a widely believed one, as most Americans are reasonable enough to approach the facts of the situation and realize such a claim is exceptionally inaccurate.

>>10555
It's exactly what's happening. I don't appreciate your denialism and gaslighting. Why defend bigotry?

Is it really so hard to just "let the left win" if what's being asked for by the left is that people get civil rights and human rights without being discriminated against in education, especially for them not being lied to in terms of history?

Must everything be a matter of "Team Blue" and "Team Red" where no such thing as objective morality exists and all that matters is if one side is "winning"?

>>10556
>Why defend bigotry?
Pointing out when something isn't true isn't "defending bigotry".

>Is it really so hard to just "let the left win" if what's being asked for by the left is that people get civil rights and human rights without being discriminated against in education, especially for them not being lied to in terms of history?
That's not what is being asked.
That's only something which exists in your mind.

>Must everything be a matter of "Team Blue" and "Team Red" where no such thing as objective morality exists and all that matters is if one side is "winning"?
You're the one taking a tribalist position of "red team bad" without even entertaining reality.

My stance is simple; Regardless of what team is where, your description of events is simply not true.

>>10557
On the off-chance that you might accept information outside of your right-wing bubble given your tribalism, maybe you should read: https://www.adl.org/blog/schools-are-using-anti-critical-race-theory-laws-to-ban-childrens-literature

>>10560
A random opinion blog article is not evidence, you realize, yes?
Perhaps this is why you've such a different worldview.
I take my view from evidence and facts, you take yours from opinion pieces and emotional appeals.

This blog asserts, without evidence, that the "intention of these state measures is to limit and prevent teachers from discussing sexism, racism and other forms of systemic oppression", from the very beginning.
It does not demonstrate this. It does not prove this. It does not give logical cause for this. It simply asserts it from the very start.

Why should I care what a very clearly heavily biased blog post says, when it's already demonstrated the writer's perfectly willing to demonize the opposition regardless of evidence, reason, or to be frank about it, basic empathy?

Do you genuinely expect me to blindly accept this article as the word of God, as though its truth is undeniable, when it doesn't even bother to make arguments, demonstrate its claims, and seems to only be invested in demonizing its opposition in a manner as dishonest as is possible?

>>10562
Maybe, someday, you'll allow facts from the real-world to pop your right-wing narrative bubble. Someday.

>>10564
You've not provided facts.
You've provided a blatantly biased opinion piece that labels its opposition evil from the get go.

Perhaps if you let go of that extreme hatred in your heart, and start engaging with people earnestly, with empathy, you'll be able to understand.

>>10565
What is it with you right-wingers and psychologically projecting your own seething hatred of regular people (as well as your inability to engage with regular people) back onto them?

I'm not the one without empathy. You are. This is obvious to everybody reading this.

I suppose next you're going to claim that I'm a racist, a fascist, an antisemite, et al because "being opposed to racism makes you the real racist" / "being opposed to X makes you the real X" / et cetera.

I'd ask you to let go of your own negativity, but then given that modern American conservativism is a belief system based on hatred, well, I guess that's not really that possible.

>>10567
>What is it with you right-wingers and psychologically projecting your own seething hatred of regular people
It literally doesn't exist outside your own head.
I've got no hatred for "regular" people, whatever rigged definition you doubtless wish to apply to such a term.
I've no cause to.

>I'm not the one without empathy. You are.
Which is why you're labeling great swaths of the population monsters without even attempting to engage with what they're saying or what their grievances are.
How empathetic of you.

I am afraid I do not consider presuming the worst of others without evidence to be "empathetic".
But then, clearly you consider empathy to be something that only applies to those you agree with.

>I suppose next you're going to claim that I'm a racist, a fascist, an antisemite, et al because "being opposed to racism makes you the real racist" / "being opposed to X makes you the real X" / et cetera.
I don't know your particular beliefs or racial presumptions, so, no, I wouldn't.
It is, after all, a shitty thing to do, to make assumptions of others and their beliefs purely because they belong to a different political allegiance to yours.

Though I suppose you wouldn't understand that, given you've already done so, and seem content to continue to do so.

>>10569
It's so funny (although, well, in a sad way) how you keep saying things like "doesn't exist outside of your own head" when everything that you're doing is based on delusions existing only in your own mind, in fact.

Again, maybe, someday, you'll allow facts from the real-world to pop your right-wing narrative bubble. Someday. I'll hold out hope.

At any rate, I'm glad that your side is losing and that racial as well as religious equality will be gaining ground in schools despite conservatives opposition to those concepts. The future must be brighter. We are all Americans, and we are all family. Despite attempts to divide.

>>10571
What have I done beyond say you're mistaken when you've made up things?.
That's hardly some grand plot requiring great fantasies of the mind
It simply requires seeing someone claim something without evidence, and say "that's not true".

You've not once thus far presented facts.
This is an objective statement of truth.  All you've thus far given was an opinion piece article making assertions, not demonstrating them, starting off with the presumption that its opposition are evil.

>>10572
At a fundamental level, yes, I'm inclined to say that conservatives' opposition to racial and religious equality based on their racial and religious nationalism is "bad" in an objective moral sense. I might not necessarily call it "evil", but I'd say that it's clearly unethical and dangerous the same way that other antisocial behavior is. That's just it.

I understand that you'll disagree, but things simply are where they are. Most people don't agree with conservatives' morality. Most people want equality.

I know that this offends you and hurts your feelings, but things are what they are. It's not that different, I guess, than accepting the fact that most people think 2+2=4 or that the sky is blue. That's just that.

Again, the future must be brighter. We are all Americans, and we are all family. Despite attempts to divide.

>>10573
>conservatives' opposition to racial and religious equality based on their racial and religious nationalism
You have not yet demonstrated this.
You've merely claimed it, without any evidence provided.
I say it's not true.
I would go further to say that these kinds of hostile presumptions of other people's motivations without any basis in reality is exceptionally immoral, with much the same objectivity.

It is certainly a dangerous and antisocial type of behavior.

You are right that most people do not believe this fabricated morality that you've created out of thin air. That is because it is a delusional philosophy that only exists inside your head.
It is a prime example of your paranoia that you've allowed to expand to such a degree that you would mark you would mark your fellow citizens as evil. It is a grand example of exactly the kind of danger that is present within ideological zealotry, as you so clearly hold.

>>10574
Once again, being anti-racism is worse than racism, being anti-anti-semitic is worse than being antisemitic, and so on. It's us who're against bigotry that're the "real bigots". And so on. How... predictable. *Sighs*

Once again, you think that normal people believing what regular people think is evil and wrong, and you can't even begin to see the irony that you're acting out of excessive hatred yourself and calling normal people insane while at the same time being on such a false moral high horse yourself in which your own status is sacrosanct and cannot be with any error.

Once again, the future must be brighter. We are all Americans, and we are all family. Despite attempts to divide.

I'm well aware that you and people like you hate me and people like me, probably to the point of wanting to do political violence to us, but I'm not going to be the same. Equality is going to win. Justice is going to win. Count on it.

Go ahead: threaten me. Vent out your spleen and issue whatever insults you want. Your side is losing and will lose completely in the end.

>>10575
>being anti-racism is worse than racism, being anti-anti-semitic is worse than being antisemitic, and so on.
I have not said this, at any point, and I very much dislike the dishonest practice of jamming words into other people's mouths.

Please keep yourself to what has actually been said so far.
Attacking people for made up things that you have never said is an exceptionally dickish rude, and frankly immoral thing to do.

I'm going to split my further apply because I think this must be said here
I want to make a point of it. I don't like this kind of shitty behavior.  I am careful with my words for a reason, so don't make up things as though I've said it.

>>10575
>you think that normal people believing what regular people think is evil and wrong,
I never said that either, so perhaps I should simply continue to this rethrough as evidenyeah it's read through it has evidently you've decided to engage in dishonest fabrications from the very start.

I never made this claim, thus you are a liar. I do not believe this at all. Respond to what I say not some made up bullshit

>you're acting out of excessive hatred yourself and calling normal people insane
What hatred have I exhibited at all thus far?
None whatsoever.
Again, you're a liar.

I've not called "normal people" insane, either.
Again, you are a liar.

>in which your own status is sacrosanct and cannot be with any error.
I've not suggested anything of the sort.
I'm sure there's cause for moral scrutiny of my actions throughout my life.
Likewise, my personal philosophical or political beliefs are not inchallengable.
You assume so, yes, but you've not bothered to even ask, let alone attempt to understand what I believe.
That I am an enemy to you is all you need to presume me the devil.

>Once again, the future must be brighter. We are all Americans, and we are all family.
Very true.

So why is it you hold the belief anyone who disagrees with you must be evil?
Why is it you do not bother to understand them, engage with them, or treat them with basic human decency and not, for example, outright lie about what they've said or belive?

That's not the actions of a unifier.

>>10576
>>10577
Any more threats and insults to get off of your chest?

Again, go ahead: threaten me. Vent out your spleen and issue whatever insults you want. Your side is losing and will lose completely in the end.

The future must be brighter. We are all Americans, and we are all family. Despite attempts to divide. I will keep believing this.

>>10578
I've made no threats.
Again you demonstrate yourself to be a liar.

Fuck you.

>>10579
Want to call me a "cuck", a "libtard", or other conservative-speak?

>>10580
I've not said any of those things.

All you can do is label me with the assumptions that exist in your head for things I've never done.

You demonstrate your moral character and the hypocrisy of your ideals
You don't want to unify. You'd condemn anyone who disagrees with you as an evil monster to be excised.

>>10581
Want to excise me as an evil monster? Go ahead. Tell me how you want to hurt me, in detail.

>>10582
Not what I said, liar.

>>10584
Any more hatred to get off of your chest? Feel free.

>>10562
Is there actually a good reason why books that used to be of great historical significance are suddenly banned?
Or that teachers should expose their lessons to parents and can get sanctions if their classes involve unapproved topics? (I suppose the same could be turned around to ask what about teachers who openly deny the holocaust or teach white supremacy, though I get this isn't really on the minds of people down South)

>>10585
I've given no hatred at any point in this thread. I've not even expressed a personal belief on such matters, not that you'd care to even know.

All you can do is lie.

>>10587
I'm kind of bored with you, to be honest, but if there's any more conservative bile that you want to let loose, please do go ahead.

Seeing you conservatives behaving as you do helps a lot in terms of my own sense of trying to be pro-equality and pro-tolerance: it's helpful to know what I'm against.

>>10588
I've literally only said your unproven claims provided without evidence are untrue.
That's hardly "conservative bile".
Hell, it's outright apolitical.

Sorry that I have the audacity to detest liars who make up things about me