ihavenopeopleskills

Divide and conquer. One of the oldest tricks in the book.

Tribalism has a great place in finding us community and support. That having been said, we must never, EVER lose sight of what is right and what is wrong.

OK…but there were many witnesses and writings of him spread all over the region. That’s a lot of written accounts in many unknown places to edit.

Source: am an ethical hacker/ red teamer.

What is the recommended on-ramp for someone with a CS degree and a networking background?

And this is why security and privacy practices are so important. It’s not important until it is.

Until MAGA isn’t the one. Until it’s somebody else, like a pro-Palestinian group or a gun control group.

Right is right and wrong is wrong.

It’s one of those things that’s OK until it isn’t.

We neocons, along with the DNC, lost our minds in the wake of 9/11. We’ve since reevaluated the implications of much of what we greenlit back then. Sadly, at this point it’s too little, too late.

Those who love this kitschy schlock think it’s innovative.

Pop and stadium country are no different.

How come?

That’s a shame, because that’s how freedom of speech functions. It’s also a great way to show the world the higher road one chooses to walk when their opponents refuse.

There’s a difference between thinking of something and doing it. Many leftists dream of punching conservatives in the face but only a few of them actually do. The ones who refrained do not rate punishment from the government over a thoughtcrime.

Please don’t play such behaviors off as if they’re exclusively exhibited by conservatives. There’s plenty of said behavior by those identifying as progressives as well.

Everyone is responsible for their own actions and behaviors. Cancelation happens both ways. Its occurrence or lack thereof can be influenced but ultimately not controlled by the subject person.

I’m glad we agree that win/win situations exist, that life isn’t a zero-sum game as George Carlin (tongue-in-cheek, I hope) suggests in “Free-Floating Hostility.”

Thank you for your respectful explanation.

I must point out, however, that those in the community the dissenter joins don’t necessarily change their views, either. If we’re going to hand out blame, then it’s a double-edged sword.

So wait til they start killing people openly before we identify their ideology as dangerous?

You illustrate my point. Whether or not an ideology is dangerous is besides the point.

You’re blocked

That’s how the left exercises “tolerance” towards those of opposing views. Again, you illustrate my point.

deleted by creator

No, you don’t, but at that point you are no longer truly “tolerant.”

When you can’t argue the point, attack the man.

deleted by creator

The issue with the tolerance paradox is it gives way to thuggery once those with the most power decide what their idea of “tolerance” will and will not actually tolerate. That’s why we have a Bill of Rights. Call it intolerant, but name something that actually tolerates more (not just “progressive” or anarchist vlaues).

If the left wants to be intolerant of a given group, that’s a fine, debatable position to have. In that case, however, it’s intellectually dishonest to refer to such a position as “tolerant.”

If “tolerance” tolerates intolerance, then who decides what is “tolerance” and “intolerance?”

Just admit who you don’t like and whose rights you want suppressed. Clearly the left has a problem with certain groups of people or they wouldn’t be beating up demonstrators of opposing ideals in an unprovoked manner.